Final expense and Term

[Todd King]

It's rider as well.

 

[WinoBlues]

JNL had a policy that paid 25% of the death benefit if you hit certain triggers. ADLs, heart attack, stroke and some others I believe.

No one that I wrote ever used it so I am not positive how it worked.

I'll see if I still have a copy of the illustration.

 

[Newby]

Nah, something wrong there. Once again, you can't couple the two things together without it being a rider. That's not legal. Not having to have a health license might just be the tell-tell on that.

It did exist. It could have been a rider. But it was the main feature of the policy. It was marketed as a critical illness policy. But it was a life policy not a health policy.

 

[goillini52]

Besides that, don't you remember from getting your basic L&H license that Life and Health can't be in the same policy without it being a rider?

What about an accident policy (health insurance) with a life insurance benefit for accidental death (not a rider)?

 

[Todd King]

Well, that wouldn't be CI, so the trigger is accident, not illness. Either way though, it probably has a rider to it. Sounds like a Accident (life) policy with a rider that pays out a portion if you don't actually die.

 

[Tahoe Ray]

It did exist. It could have been a rider. But it was the main feature of the policy. It was marketed as a critical illness policy. But it was a life policy not a health policy.

It was a rider I'm sure but no different than hybrid LTC.

Those are built on life and annuity chassis but no one would ever buy one unless they wanted long-term care coverage (since there are much better annuity/life options for those objectives).

 

[me112233]

Nah, something wrong there. Once again, you can't couple the two things together without it being a rider. That's not legal. Not having to have a health license might just be the tell-tell on that.

A little to aggressive on what is legal and not legal. You can wrap health insurance benefits inside a life policy, as is quite commonly done for long term care these days. It's an accelerated benefit provision in the policy, and pays out a fixed percentage of the face amount each month for your LTC. Terminal illness riders were the first major move by life insurers into what is a health-based benefit (doctor says you have a terminal illness with 9 months to live, call up the life insurance company and get 75% paid out now). So, you can do the same thing with specified disease (critical illness) benefits, even if you aren't deemed to have a terminal illness; just accelerate a portion of the policy if diagnosed with internal cancer, or you have a stroke, or whatever. If you never have any of those events prior to your death, it pays out as a life insurance benefit. The policies can be written as a base life policy with a rider, or can be written as a stand-alone (no rider) policy with the terms of what could have been a rider incorporated into the policy. Most often when you see it sold as a combined package, the company finds it easier to use a base policy + rider format; it's just not an absolute requirement. There's no law that I'm aware of that says a life insurance company can't pay out your death benefit while you are still alive (would be bad business probably, but not aware of a law to that effect).

 

[Todd King]

And as I said and keep saying, they are riders.

Someone please show me one policy that has life and health where one isn't a rider. There is a reason it's a rider.