FINRA misleading statement???

[Crabcake Johnny]

The reverse mortgage counseling might be a joke but you certainly can't sign up a senior "one shot one kill" in the house.

And don't even get me going on 401K's. I think America is going to be in very deep trouble 20 or so years after the baby boomer's retire. I actually think it could be catastrophic.

 

[Mr. Bill]

I think you'd be surprised. You should've seen me in Washington Mutual Tuesday when Monday evening a client told me she had to "pay $95 to get a cd" - WHAT????

Oh yes, the branch manager ended up taking care of things. The agent (she's just a regular joe, not licensed for securities or anything) - "You seemed as if you understood everything!!! You didn't say you didn't understand!!!"

The reverse mortgage counselors don't require that there be someone OBJECTIVE to review the situation with the senior. Therefore, if you have a confused senior who "appears" to understand, I don't know what to say.

On another note, 2 salesmen came to another client's home one day. 5 hours and no ability to use her own bathroom, and she signed paperwork to have her patio cover (about 15X20, wood, not a big deal) for $5,000. She told me she would've signed ANYTHING because she was just completely worn out and really had to go to the bathroom. They were there on a Friday, office closed til Monday. It wasn't until I threatened them with a lawsuit under elder abuse (every district attorney has this division, or should!) that they accepted a cancellation (oh yes, many faxes back and forth etc. It wasn't easy!)

FINRA's not the answer (I agree with URDRWHO with respect to bonds in the portfolios for UL).

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

What I would be interested in is your answer. No, there will never be perfection or even anything close.

But if were up to you, what changes would you put in place to better protect seniors from the few unethical annuity agents?

 

[URDRWHO]

If you are of a certain age do you:

A: Buy a CD paying the pittance they pay
B: Do a savings account at 1.5%
c: Mutual Fund - see how you like it these days
d: FIA - 10% penalty free W/D's

The above is not talking about money you need for daily needs, etc. Outside of the false headlines, the current seniors have a lot of money.

You seem to think that a bad health policy on a young family is not devastating. Tell that to the family that didn't have the chemo rider. My neighbor just had a bout with cancer and $100,000 later he is ok.

No my friend, a bad health policy devastates people just as much as the senior that put bread and milk money in an FIA. Groups such as Families USA use bad health plans as ammo for Nationalized healthare.

I plead with you not to give certain demographics of people more rights than the population. It is what government does best....breaking us into groups and pitting us against each other. It is leading to a breakdown of the Republic.


I said it before, the big wirehouses see a change in their business model and they are one of the groups that want the FIA to become a registered product. They want the FIA for themselves.

Where do you get this idea that seniors are more trusting? These are people that lived their lives, saw a lot did a lot and are not stupid. You are falling for the media lie that seniors are stupid.

More talk, less trade seen on Wall Street - InvestmentNews

"I don't know exactly what [the major brokerage] firms are going to look like, but I do know they're going to look a lot more like advisory firms" by managing a range of assets for a fee, said a Smith Barney broker on the East Coast who asked not to be identified."

I won't get off the seniors bit. If annuities are so great, why are they not targeted to simply everyone? Why don't I have an EIA instead of mutual funds?

The obvious answer is time-frame. I have the needed time for an adjustment when the market dips.

Seniors - as a group (obvious exceptions) are more trusting. You often remind them of their grandson and in a million years they would never think you'd steer them wrong.

They, as a group (obvious exceptions) are not internet and research savvy. That 36 year old potential Mega client can hit the net and do a lot of research.

Most seniors - especially 70 years plus, are not gonna hit the net and conduct annuity research.

Now we get into the few, not the most. But a few seniors have diminished mental capability - they are starting to slip a little and simply will sign anything.

An unethical agent can take great advantage of such seniors.

We can take a look at reverse mortgages. Does anyone kick and scream that counseling is mandatory to get a reverse mortgage?

Now...why is counseling mandatory? HUD Reverse Mortgage Housing Counselors List

We can accept an extra layer of protection so unethical agents don't recommend a reverse mortgage that's not a proper fit yet we'll allow an insurance agent to take all $760,834 a senior saves and ram it into an annuity after ONE presentation?

So maybe instead of SEC getting into the picture we go the reverse mortgage path; mandatory counseling for seniors before they're allowed to sign.

 

[URDRWHO]

Make all agents salaried only, no bonuses, no incentives allowed. Will that do?

Someone previously said that commission was the reason that unscrupulous sales people sell unsuitable products. Salary would take away the incentive to do wrong.

The bigger P&C agencies often have their sales people salaried.

What I would be interested in is your answer. No, there will never be perfection or even anything close.

But if were up to you, what changes would you put in place to better protect seniors from the few unethical annuity agents?

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

I don't think it needs to go that far. Carriers could have a review department. Everything is computerized and a program could be designed to flag "unusual" trends.

For example, say an Assurant agent has turned in 12 Right Starts in a row. A flag could be raised, generates a call to that agent to review their sales methods. After the review call it's now been determined that said agent was mis-trained as to the limitations of the plan.

Same for annuities - a particular agent has an unusually high number of apps coming in that really don't seem to be a proper fit. Agent gets a call and a review of sales methods is performed.

Come to find that agent was mis-trained by an "Annuity Univ" method and the agent simply didn't know the facts or how to conduct a proper needs analysis.

The carriers could also use "secret shoppers." If they smell a rat - they could have an industry rep pose as a client to ascertain sales methods. This also could be used to plant an agent in agency training to see which agencies are training correctly.

Also, another fix - and I said this before - "word in the street."

Sacrifice the next agent who simply does everything wrong....on purpose. Take a blatantly unethical agent and:

Remove his appointment
File with the DOI to remove license
Press charges

Put the word out that unethical behavior will not be accepted and result in very harsh punishment.

 

[URDRWHO]

Those are good ideas and I can agree with them. They are very close to the same ideas I had for the agents that give bait and switch life illustrations. You know, the agent that looks a 300 pound man in the face and gives the guy a best preferred life illustration.

Insurance companies could monitor those agents that are doing the funny business with illustrations.

I don't think it needs to go that far. Carriers could have a review department. Everything is computerized and a program could be designed to flag "unusual" trends.

For example, say an Assurant agent has turned in 12 Right Starts in a row. A flag could be raised, generates a call to that agent to review their sales methods. After the review call it's now been determined that said agent was mis-trained as to the limitations of the plan.

Same for annuities - a particular agent has an unusually high number of apps coming in that really don't seem to be a proper fit. Agent gets a call and a review of sales methods is performed.

Come to find that agent was mis-trained by an "Annuity Univ" method and the agent simply didn't know the facts or how to conduct a proper needs analysis.

The carriers could also use "secret shoppers." If they smell a rat - they could have an industry rep pose as a client to ascertain sales methods. This also could be used to plant an agent in agency training to see which agencies are training correctly.

Also, another fix - and I said this before - "word in the street."

Sacrifice the next agent who simply does everything wrong....on purpose. Take a blatantly unethical agent and:

Remove his appointment
File with the DOI to remove license
Press charges

Put the word out that unethical behavior will not be accepted and result in very harsh punishment.

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

All agree - however the carriers seems to be very adverse to taking this kind of action.

In fact, it's the reverse. Production talks. I have knowledge (100% proof) of high producing agents caught doing acts that would result not only in loss of appointment but loss of license.

Action taken? Nothing. They are either scared to "sit" on these unethical agents or at the top levels this is a more whore-ish industry then I thought.

 

[URDRWHO]

Believe me....insurance is not alone and the securities industry is also very "whore-ish."

In fact studies have been done showing that ethical standards for the general population are not as good as they were at one time. Ethics has become a college course. It is very telling for a society when we need a college professor to teach people the difference between right and wrong.

All agree - however the carriers seems to be very adverse to taking this kind of action.

In fact, it's the reverse. Production talks. I have knowledge (100% proof) of high producing agents caught doing acts that would result not only in loss of appointment but loss of license.

Action taken? Nothing. They are either scared to "sit" on these unethical agents or at the top levels this is a more whore-ish industry then I thought.