How Are You Getting a "Letter of Dis-Enrollment" from MAPD Carriers for Med Supp Underwriters?

No. Jacob gets it.

If a company requires something needless and difficult to produce, why would you ever write that company?

Because their rates and commissions are easily the best uncertain parts of country.

----------

Because their rates and commissions are easily the best uncertain parts of country.

In, not un! Darn spell check. And apparently you have to wait 30 seconds between posts!?
 
I did have one agent who was going through all of this to get the GI for the trial right and forgot to notice that not only was it within 12 months of the MA start date, it was still within six, so the member was still in OE and only the replacement form him was required. Not suggesting that is the case here, of course, but something that can overlooked when going for this trial right.

Even if the client is within 6 months of turning 65 and are OE, if they are coming off an MA many carriers still require the disenrollment letter from the carrier. Crazy but true. The replacement form isnt sufficient. Equitable and all the ones they TPA require it as well.

I avoid them in these cases...
 
Any method that works? Seems to be a catch 22 and I'll having trouble wrapping my head around the Med Supp carrier's logic on this one.

Trans America Med Supp is requiring a "Letter of Dis-Enrollment" from the MAPD before offering coverage on their Med Supp for several clients who signed up for a MAPD upon turning 65, and who have not been in it long, absolutely less than 12 months.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a client is technically dis-enrolled from the MAPD upon enrollment in a separate Part D from the MAPD.

The Part D conveys the information on the new enrollment in their plan to Medicare, and the Part D carrier communicates that info to the MAPD carrier, and then the client has to request this "Letter of Dis-Enrollment, " then the client has to sign it, return it to the MAPD and then the MAPD must produce said letter on my request for me to send to Trans America Med Supp underwriting.

This must all take place before the beginning of the month, when the client will effectively be without coverage-without the MAPD-because the enrollment to the Part D and the Med Supp were simultaneous, and both begin 9/1/2016.

It will totally be seamless. Yea, right.:twitchy:

This additional layer of bureaucracy is IMHO is asinine, and redundant. :swoon:

Opinions?

The PDP carrier doesn't communicate anything to the MAPD carrier. The PDP carrier processes the enrollment and they notify CMS. Upon acceptance of the PDP enrollment, CMS notifies the MAPD carrier of the termination of coverage. The MAPD carrier then has X number of days from the notification to send out the disenrollment letter.
 
Even if the client is within 6 months of turning 65 and are OE, if they are coming off an MA many carriers still require the disenrollment letter from the carrier. Crazy but true. The replacement form isnt sufficient. Equitable and all the ones they TPA require it as well. I avoid them in these cases...
Good to know. Haven't stumbled onto one of those. I suppose if a company has made a decision to be unnecessarily difficult it might as well go all in.
 
I did have one agent who was going through all of this to get the GI for the trial right and forgot to notice that not only was it within 12 months of the MA start date, it was still within six, so the member was still in OE and only the replacement form him was required. Not suggesting that is the case here, of course, but something that can overlooked when going for this trial right.

All clients are still within their OE, AND have trial right-less than 12 months on MAPD. Replacement forms were sent with the Med Supp applications.

So, it's total BS. Super frustrating!

Loss ratios are something to consider when choosing Med Supp companies, and Trans America at 95% has much higher loss ratios than Aetna or Cigna both at 75%. Central States Indemnity has the greatest at over 166%. Manhattan Life has a loss ratio of 121% (All these ratios are from the CSG actuarial site.)

Mostly, seniors are concerned with price, even to the point where they jump at offers from Mutual of Omaha companies received in the mail. Then, I show them the rate histories for MOFO family Med Supps.

The poster that uses MOFO for Med Supp should seriously look at the thread on Mutual of Omaha Med Supp rate increases, heck, look at the MOFO website, and rewrite all the healthy people they can, now, on another carrier as a preemptive measure. Show your clients you care by helping them with what you learn.:yes:
 
All clients are still within their OE, AND have trial right-less than 12 months on MAPD. Replacement forms were sent with the Med Supp applications.

So, it's total BS. Super frustrating!

Loss ratios are something to consider when choosing Med Supp companies, and Trans America at 95% has much higher loss ratios than Aetna or Cigna both at 75%. Central States Indemnity has the greatest at over 166%. Manhattan Life has a loss ratio of 121% (All these ratios are from the CSG actuarial site.)

Mostly, seniors are concerned with price, even to the point where they jump at offers from Mutual of Omaha companies received in the mail. Then, I show them the rate histories for MOFO family Med Supps.

The poster that uses MOFO for Med Supp should seriously look at the thread on Mutual of Omaha Med Supp rate increases, heck, look at the MOFO website, and rewrite all the healthy people they can, now, on another carrier as a preemptive measure. Show your clients you care by helping them with what you learn.:yes:


He's well aware of MOFO's rate history. Some people either don't learn...or don't care.:)
 
He's well aware of MOFO's rate history. Some people either don't learn...or don't care.:)

I believe he's the same one who used to only sell the GI Plan N. I wonder how that worked out for all those people he pushed into that product?
 
Back
Top