Life Ins W LTC

[ltcadviser]

The issue is not what percentage of claims turn out to be permanent; the issue is what percentage of claims when filed are expected to be permanent. Not sure any studies are done regarding this hypothetical. Tyler, you may never have an issue with a chronic illness rider, and I hope you do not.

 

[CALTCAgent]

I never implied it should be either or. Or that chronic care riders are a substitute for traditional ltci.

I was simply trying to gauge the effectiveness of the riders that do have that stipulation.

I agree. I did not see where you implied one way or the other. I am interested in the discussion.

 

[Mr_Ed]

Based on Jack's post, they would pay benefits for around 95% of LTC claims. To stay on the conservative side I would guess the number is closer to 90%.

For the benefit of the other participants on this forum, can you explain how you came up with these percentages?

 

[ltcadviser]

Tyler, I agree that most LTC claims END UP being a permanent need. My very first claimant in 1999 recovered, however. Either way, the word "permanent" is not a word I would want in an insurance contract-and surely not if the company has a B+ rating.

I suppose it is easy to rationalize the use of a word here and a word there; keep in mind an insurance company could elect to write its contract without the word "permanent" if it so chooses. It incorporates the word to protect its interests.

---------

 

[scagnt83]

The issue is not what percentage of claims turn out to be permanent; the issue is what percentage of claims when filed are expected to be permanent. Not sure any studies are done regarding this hypothetical.

Good point. Whats expected could certainly be different than what occurs... it would be interesting to find some type of numbers on this.

----------

Tyler, you may never have an issue with a chronic illness rider, and I hope you do not.

Well Jack, like I said before I dont sell chronic illness riders as a replacement for LTCI. It is just an added benefit to the core need the product is sold to cover.

So why would I have a problem???

And what is wrong with wanting to know the effectiveness of a feature on a product???????

----------

Either way, the word "permanent" is not a word I would want in an insurance contract-and surely not if the company has a B+ rating.

I suppose it is easy to rationalize the use of a word here and a word there; keep in mind an insurance company could elect to write its contract without the word "permanent" if it so chooses. It incorporates the word to protect its interests.

---------

I agree that it is there to minimize the use of the Rider. That is why I am trying to figure out what that minimization would be....


And I never ever would sell a B rated life product.... NA/Midland is A+ rated... not sure where the B rated comment came from...

 

[ltcadviser]

Good point. Whats expected could certainly be different than what occurs... it would be interesting to find some type of numbers on this.

----------




Well Jack, like I said before I dont sell chronic illness riders as a replacement for LTCI. It is just an added benefit to the core need the product is sold to cover.

So why would I have a problem???

And what is wrong with wanting to know the effectiveness of a feature on a product???????

----------




I agree that it is there to minimize the use of the Rider. That is why I am trying to figure out what that minimization would be....


And I never ever would sell a B rated life product.... NA/Midland is A+ rated... not sure where the B rated comment came from...

B rated comment had nothing to do with you. It is just observation that companies with poor ratings will figure out a way to not double income.

 

[scagnt83]

B rated comment had nothing to do with you. It is just observation that companies with poor ratings will figure out a way to not double income.

The problem in the annuity world is that the strongest Rider that doubles (phoenix) is one of the weakest companies. I read recently that they are looking to sell. And over the past 2 years all the ratings companies have lowered them and put them on a negative outlook.

At least on the life side, the strongest riders are from very strong companies.

 

[Tahoe Ray]

The problem in the annuity world is that the strongest Rider that doubles (phoenix) is one of the weakest companies. I read recently that they are looking to sell. And over the past 2 years all the ratings companies have lowered them and put them on a negative outlook.

At least on the life side, the strongest riders are from very strong companies.

Forethought, State Life, and Lincoln have the strongest LTC annuity products. Very little upside but significant (relatively speaking) LTC benefits...

Many products besides Phoenix (like F&G) also have a doubler.

 

[ltcadviser]

Forethought, State Life, and Lincoln have the strongest LTC annuity products. Very little upside but significant (relatively speaking) LTC benefits...

Many products besides Phoenix (like F&G) also have a doubler.

Lincoln long term care annuity is 50% home care; 5 year vesting schedule and excludes facilities operating primarily for mental nervous disorders. Would never pick the Lincoln annuity over the State Life annuity.

 

[scagnt83]

Forethought, State Life, and Lincoln have the strongest LTC annuity products. Very little upside but significant (relatively speaking) LTC benefits...

Many products besides Phoenix (like F&G) also have a doubler.

On the fixed side MoO used to have a good LTC Annuity. Not sure how it stacks up these days (or if they still offer it).


I know that many Index products have the doubler. My point was that Phoenix has the strongest out of all of them, but has the lowest ratings.