Fidelity Life FE

[DayTimer]

"Ignorance of the LAW is no defense".. Just plain ignorance may be a defense...

It may be an excuse, but it is not a defense. I agree with Newby - he probably did believe he was doing good. However, it should be clear to him now that he needs to find a new carrier for day one level coverage of diabetics with neuropathy.

 

[VolAgent]

It may be an excuse, but it is not a defense. I agree with Newby - he probably did believe he was doing good. However, it should be clear to him now that he needs to find a new carrier for day one level coverage of diabetics with neuropathy.

Again, it is ignorance of the law, not ignorance. Below is the Tennessee statue on insurance fraud.

Any person who, knowingly and with intent to defraud, and for the purpose of depriving another of property or for pecuniary gain, commits, participates in or aids, abets, or conspires to commit or solicits another person to commit, or intentionally permits its employees or its agents to commit any of the following acts, has committed a fraudulent insurance act:

» Tennessee Code 56-53-102 – Fraudulent insurance act — Criminal violationsLawServer

To be fraud, it requires knowledge and intent. Also since it says defraud, there has to be knowledge that you are lying, twisting the truth, or otherwise being deceptive.

 

[DayTimer]

Again, it is ignorance of the law, not ignorance. Below is the Tennessee statue on insurance fraud.



» Tennessee Code 56-53-102 – Fraudulent insurance act — Criminal violationsLawServer

To be fraud, it requires knowledge and intent. Also since it says defraud, there has to be knowledge that you are lying, twisting the truth, or otherwise being deceptive.

I wasn't putting a label on it such as fraud. I wasn't even suggesting it would rise to criminal charges. However, I do believe that if an insured had a policy rescinded as a result and the beneficiary was denied the death benefit, a civil case could be made, and perhaps his E&O insurer might be on the hook for damages. "I was ignorant of the published underwriting guidelines provided by the carrier for the exclusive use of agents" would likely not fly as a defense against civil liability.

I am certainly not suggesting anyone should lose his freedom as a punishment in this case, nor even permanently lose his or her producer license.

 

[VolAgent]

I wasn't putting a label on it such as fraud. I wasn't even suggesting it would rise to criminal charges. However, I do believe that if an insured had a policy rescinded as a result and the beneficiary was denied the death benefit, a civil case could be made, and perhaps his E&O insurer might be on the hook for damages. "I was ignorant of the published underwriting guidelines provided by the carrier for the exclusive use of agents" would likely not fly as a defense against civil liability.

I am certainly not suggesting anyone should lose his freedom as a punishment in this case, nor even permanently lose his or her producer license.

That is certainly a possibility. It definitely should stop and I wouldn't be surprised if a certain someone has already called Prosperity on it. It gives the industry a black eye as it causes unnecessary rescissions which further damages the reputation of the insurance industry.

 

[myinsurebiz]

I prefer clean sheets . . .