Med Supp 2-3 Hour Appointment?

[jody108]

When I sell an FE policy, I'm there at the outside 1 hour. And thats if I eat some cake and have a glass of tea with the applicant, after visiting for 20 minutes. Usually, I have done the deed in 30 minutes and left the scene !!

This is my first med supp appointment that started yesterday:

I am trying to get this med supp thing. I really, really am, but I have a family member with Plan L ! I have talked for 2 days with her and she keeps coming up with question after question after question. She knows more about it than I do. I am trying to get her on G, but the deductible questions and medicine questions, and doctor questions are just slamming me against the wall. I know I will write it, but its gonna take more time and research.....

NO, I have'nt trained....NO, I have'nt taken any courses, and NO I have'nt consulted with Frank. So, I don't need those whippings with a razor strap right now.

But here are the questions.

Even if I was trained, I can see these things lasting for days while they ask me question after question, consult with children, sisters, brothers, doctors, neighbors and the mail man.

Are all these deals this way? Is every appointment a 3 hour visit? Does every carrier have a 15 page application? I don't want to marry these people. I just want to get in and get out.

I guess maybe you just hope you run into those deals where the applicant is clueless, you put 'em on a plan, do the lawwwwwwnnnnnng application, and then hit the road. And I can see that taking 2 or more hours on an easy deal.

Is this the case?

Wow, I would be there 5 hours. My FE appointments are almost always 2 hours.

I give the customer as long as they need. If they want to do business with me, I don't rush it at all.

It's likely your next appointment forgot about you anyway... so why rush off to a no show.

Or if they are waiting for you, they will still let you in and do business with you still and then you give them all the time they need.

I make friends with my clients and sometimes there are hugs and tears... or whatever... it's very personal and it works very well.

So I don't think it's a big deal and I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[alphawave2k]

I had a physician a few months back and it turned out he did not have part b ...it turns out that he also needed to have part b to make his small group plan work that he was enrolled in. (his practice was the group and he lost it when he became to sick to work so I moved him over to a supp). Now it turns out that aetna won't pay the part that part b was supposed to cover and he had major medical bills before he died of prostate..

Can you or someone clarify if the Part B is a mandatory sign up once you hit 65 even if you are covered under a group major med (qualified creditable coverage?). It seems redundant to have to pay both your Medicare Part B and whatever portion of your cost share for the group plan if any. Yes, I understand if over 20 ee's, group is primary, and over 20 ee's the opposite is true.

Also, you have clients who want to sign up for a supp but just suubmitted their paperwork for part b yesterday but want to know if they are going to hear back on their supp application before the beginning of next month, which oh by the way could be in three days. So, knowing what is going on with their part b status helps me to set expectations better. I would rather send the app in and let the part b catch up with it rather than wait for the part b to come through and have someone else sign them up. Gets untidy sometimes but it is doable at least with the carriers I work with.

I actually have a prospect who is coming off major med, and never had Part B, that I was going to sign up, UHC/AARP med sup. I told him I couldn't write him until he had his Part B in place. Apparently that is not a carved in stone requirement?

 

[Russ]

Can you or someone clarify if the Part B is a mandatory sign up once you hit 65 even if you are covered under a group major med (qualified creditable coverage?). It seems redundant to have to pay both your Medicare Part B and whatever portion of your cost share for the group plan if any. Yes, I understand if over 20 ee's, group is primary, and over 20 ee's the opposite is true.

I actually have a prospect who is coming off major med, and never had Part B, that I was going to sign up, UHC/AARP med sup. I told him I couldn't write him until he had his Part B in place. Apparently that is not a carved in stone requirement?

It's not mandatory at age 65 in the example you gave.

If they have applied for part B you can write them a supplement and make it effective the date the part B is suppose to start.

Look on page 22 of the Medicare and You 2010 handbook for a detailed explanation.

 

[Frank Stastny]

Can you or someone clarify if the Part B is a mandatory sign up once you hit 65 even if you are covered under a group major med (qualified creditable coverage?). It seems redundant to have to pay both your Medicare Part B and whatever portion of your cost share for the group plan if any. Yes, I understand if over 20 ee's, group is primary, and over 20 ee's the opposite is true.

Medicare Part B is never mandatory. It is always the seniors option even if they are not covered by a group health plan. In fact, if they are covered by a group health plan they SHOULD NOT take Part B.

I actually have a prospect who is coming off major med, and never had Part B, that I was going to sign up, UHC/AARP med sup. I told him I couldn't write him until he had his Part B in place. Apparently that is not a carved in stone requirement?

You are a well informed, intelligent agent who has their prospect's best interest in mind. Not one who is more worried about the commission they are going to make. I applaud you!

No, you should not write a Med Supp on someone who does not have Part B in effect. Many times there will be a several month wait before they can get Part B and have it effective. It is "carved in stone".

They cannot apply for and a company will not issue a Med Supp unless they have Part B in effect. Look at the application. It asks if they have Part B and several ask for the effective date of their Part B. If anyone tells you otherwise they obviously don't know what they are doing.

Regardless of what anyone says, and how and when they write the app an agent should not lie and say that the prospect has Part B if it is not already effective. I would consider this a lie and a huge disservice to the prospect I was talking to. The agent should be censored at the very least.

Agents selling only Med Supps really don't need E&O insurance. The companies don't require it because Med Supps are "cut and dry". However, if an agent is going to lie to the prospect and try to "fool the insurance company" and put inaccurate information on the application the agent better have several million dollars in E&O coverage.

I have said over and over again. This is a great place to get general information and opinions. But, if it is something that is going to effect one's income or their ability to remain an agent in "good standing" it is incumbent on them to do their own research. Do not "take to the bank" the information that is posted on this discussion board. It could "put you out of business". That would really suck for most of us.

Never write an app if the prospect does not have Part B in effect regardless of what you may read here.

If anyone wants to argue that point with me send me your new client's name and the company you wrote the policy on. I will call the company, give them your new client's name and tell them what you did and see what kind of "feed back" you receive from the company.

It's no wonder agents have the kind of reputation we do.

 

[Russ]

You can write MoO med-supps up to 6 months before a person turns 65 in Florida. If it's 4-6 months before their Medicare part B starts, there's a great chance they will not already have their Medicare card.

I recently wrote a lady that will be 65 in April of 2010. I'm looking at a copy of the application right now.

Part 2...question one....Are you covered under Medicare....Part A, I answered no....Part B, I answered no.
If "No," when will you become eligible...I listed 04-01-10.

Policy was issued a couple of weeks ago.

Here's the MoO underwriting guideline....https://pipeservices.ipipeline.com/PipeStreamService.svc/api/Document/90fefb03-c518-4169-b0ea-fa489840cdd7/LK?Profile=1903&SearchGuid=fa128e5a-9722-499e-90b7-c33f6ba7884b&user_id=SSO_Sysuser01901&api_key=1903%2C1903%2C84600%2C2010-02-16%2013%3A32%3A44Z%2CCU%2C7o8jKKuRW%2FFKAFnV%2BRE%2FfQ%3D%3D&hmac=2914d27fdec5d3e5a7f24e405aabf463

Look on page 3 and 4 of the booklet for Florida.

Page 3..."Open Enrollment
To be eligible for Open Enrollment, an applicant must be at least 64 1/2 years of age (in most states) and be within
six months of his/her enrollment in Medicare Part B."

Page 4 applies to disability supplements...."States with Under Age 65 Requirements....Florida All plans are available. Coverage is guarantee issue if applied for within six months of
Part B enrollment."

................................................................................................................................................

I wrote a lady a MoO med-supp on December 15th, 2008. She already had part A, but didn't have part B because she had group coverage through her job. She was retiring the end of 2008 and canceling her group coverage(effective January 1st, 2009) and had applied for her Medicare part B to be effective January 1st, 2009. No penalty for late enrollment in part B(creditable coverage). She was 67 at that time.

She didn't have her updated Medicare card with the part B effective date listed(1-1-09). Policy was issued and is still in force.

On the app I checked yes...are you covered under Medicare part A. I checked no...are you covered under Medicare part B. I checked yes...that she had enrolled in Medicare part B in the last 6 months.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Medicare Part B is never mandatory. It is always the seniors option even if they are not covered by a group health plan. In fact, if they are covered by a group health plan they SHOULD NOT take Part B.



You are a well informed, intelligent agent who has their prospect's best interest in mind. Not one who is more worried about the commission they are going to make. I applaud you!

No, you should not write a Med Supp on someone who does not have Part B in effect. Many times there will be a several month wait before they can get Part B and have it effective. It is "carved in stone".

They cannot apply for and a company will not issue a Med Supp unless they have Part B in effect. Look at the application. It asks if they have Part B and several ask for the effective date of their Part B. If anyone tells you otherwise they obviously don't know what they are doing.

Regardless of what anyone says, and how and when they write the app an agent should not lie and say that the prospect has Part B if it is not already effective. I would consider this a lie and a huge disservice to the prospect I was talking to. The agent should be censored at the very least.

Agents selling only Med Supps really don't need E&O insurance. The companies don't require it because Med Supps are "cut and dry". However, if an agent is going to lie to the prospect and try to "fool the insurance company" and put inaccurate information on the application the agent better have several million dollars in E&O coverage.

I have said over and over again. This is a great place to get general information and opinions. But, if it is something that is going to effect one's income or their ability to remain an agent in "good standing" it is incumbent on them to do their own research. Do not "take to the bank" the information that is posted on this discussion board. It could "put you out of business". That would really suck for most of us.

Never write an app if the prospect does not have Part B in effect regardless of what you may read here.

If anyone wants to argue that point with me send me your new client's name and the company you wrote the policy on. I will call the company, give them your new client's name and tell them what you did and see what kind of "feed back" you receive from the company.

It's no wonder agents have the kind of reputation we do.

Being you never responded.........

I'm assuming you were responding to my post of....."If they have applied for part B you can write them a supplement and make it effective the date the part B is suppose to start."......

with Mutual of Omaha, you can. I cited an example of a case I had and I'm sorry to inform you...you're wrong.

This from Social Security online.....

III. Special Enrollment Period (SEP)
The special enrollment period for Part B may occur during any month you are covered under a group health plan based on current employment.......

Coverage begins with either:
· The first day of the month of Part B enrollment, or
· With the first day of any of the following three months, at your option.





That's exactly what the lady I wrote did....used her SEP and put an effective date of January 1st, 2009 on the form during mid-December of 2008 and I put January 1st, 2009 on the MoO med-supp, as an effective date.

As far as the rest of your post(and I'm assuming you were applying to my post), "lie" and "disservice" and "reputation"....I'll wait on you to respond.

As far as someone turning 65 and getting Medicare....MoO allows you to write them up to 6 months before age 65 and they will, in all likelihood, not already have their Medicare card, if it's 4-6 months before Medicare starts.

There is nothing unethical about that. Once again, I'm assuming you were talking to me.

Sorry...you're wrong. Very wrong.

 

[Winter_123]

Never write an app if the prospect does not have Part B in effect regardless of what you may read here.

.

Oh. I dunno. I think the requirement is to follow the laws and the carriers rules. If their rule is that the applicant must have part b at the time of the application then that is what must be followed. Otherwise the requirement is to be truthful on the application if their process allows for application before part b enrollment.

Example: Mutual of Omaha clearly asks if you have Part B and when the effective date is. It then goes on to ask "If not, when you do plan to enroll." If you are truthfully answering that you do not have Part B and their process is to look it up and confirm that you do have it before issuing the med supp, I don't see anything wrong with that and apparently their compliance folks don't either. I never would rely on what some zamboni at the carriers office says but this is a fundamental part of their application process and is built right into their application.

Note again though that I am saying that this is completely different from a scenario where the agent assumes that a person has Part B or says that they do just because it has been applied for. Don't go there or even think about stating that they do unless you know that by looking at their card or calling Medicare/SS with them or something like that.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I actually have a prospect who is coming off major med, and never had Part B, that I was going to sign up, UHC/AARP med sup. I told him I couldn't write him until he had his Part B in place. Apparently that is not a carved in stone requirement?

I don't know whether a major med plan counts as a creditable plan or not. Perhaps others can help me with that but if it is not and he has missed the deadline for signing up for Part B it is not pretty.

Probably he is okay but just giving you a little heads up that he needs to roll with some timelines here to get Part B.

 

[Russ]

Oh. I dunno. I think the requirement is to follow the laws and the carriers rules. If their rule is that the applicant must have part b at the time of the application then that is what must be followed. Otherwise the requirement is to be truthful on the application if their process allows for application before part b enrollment.

Example: Mutual of Omaha clearly asks if you have Part B and when the effective date is. It then goes on to ask "If not, when you do plan to enroll." If you are truthfully answering that you do not have Part B and their process is to look it up and confirm that you do have it before issuing the med supp, I don't see anything wrong with that and apparently their compliance folks don't either. I never would rely on what some zamboni at the carriers office says but this is a fundamental part of their application process and is built right into their application.

Note again though that I am saying that this is completely different from a scenario where the agent assumes that a person has Part B or says that they do just because it has been applied for. Don't go there or even think about stating that they do unless you know that by looking at their card or calling Medicare/SS with them or something like that.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


I don't know whether a major med plan counts as a creditable plan or not. Perhaps others can help me with that but if it is not and he has missed the deadline for signing up for Part B it is not pretty.

Probably he is okay but just giving you a little heads up that he needs to roll with some timelines here to get Part B.

The lady I gave the example on above had a major-med through the Cope Center in the town I live in. It counted as creditable coverage.

Thank you for a voice of reason on the...enrolling someone on a med-supp w/MoO, before their Medicare card has their part B effective date listed.

There's nothing unethical about doing it. Not with MoO. And I don't appreciate being labeled as such and I'm 99% sure he was referring to me.

I've said this before and I'll state in again....I call T65's about 4 months before their Medicare starts. I do so because Bankers Life and AARP has agents that call the same T65's about 3 months before their Medicare starts because they can't write them until 90 days before their Medicare starts.

I'm trying to get a jump on them. Yes, it's about making commission, but that's what this job is all about....making $$$$$$$$$$.

I've had a few cases where someone bought a supplement from me because I was the first one to call them. It also helps that MoO's rate in this area are the lowest for a med-supp.

 

[Frank Stastny]

Russ,

I was trying to respond to the specific question, I guess I assumed that everyone knew about the OEP and other times when the agent actually knows when Part B would become effective.

I'm aware that you write apps 4, 5, and sometimes 6 months in advance of the effective date of a prospects Medicare. You know they are going to get it and you already know what the effective date is going to be.

This is what I was responding to:
Originally Posted by alphawave2k

I actually have a prospect who is coming off major med, and never had Part B, that I was going to sign up, UHC/AARP med sup. I told him I couldn't write him until he had his Part B in place. Apparently that is not a carved in stone requirement?

That indicates to me that 1. He has been on Medicare for some time. 2. He doesn't have Part B 3. The agent was asked to write an app.

I assumed that alphawave's client had not applied for Part B yet otherwise I figured he would have said so. If his client doesn't have Part B and has not applied for it then he should not write the app.

If his client has applied for Part B but it isn't in effect yet then the agent should not write the app with an effective date prior to the effective date of Part B.

I was trying, apparently not hard enough, to address his specific question. I guess you took it as an all encompassing statement. My bad.

​

 

[alphawave2k]

Russ,
I was trying to respond to the specific question, I guess I assumed that everyone knew about the OEP and other times when the agent actually knows when Part B would become effective.

I'm aware that you write apps 4, 5, and sometimes 6 months in advance of the effective date of a prospects Medicare. You know they are going to get it and you already know what the effective date is going to be.

Russ and Frank. First of all, you both obviously know a lot more about this than someone with less time in, and you both are right from what I understand. No need to get riled up about who is right or wrong, but here is the specific situation. This prospect had been on a group major med policy, and had not enrolled in Part B (the right move for him). His major med was going away, and he had/has applied for Part B but still not sure when it is going into effect. He had been getting the "run-around" from Medicare, he says, and hadn't gotten his card or any notification as of yet. So, I obviously couldn't write him up not having specifics, though I assume I could have just said applied for Part B

Originally Posted by Russ
There's nothing unethical about doing it. Not with MoO. And I don't appreciate being labeled as such and I'm 99% sure he was referring to me..

I assumed that alphawave's client had not applied for Part B yet otherwise I figured he would have said so. If his client doesn't have Part B and has not applied for it then he should not write the app.

My error in not being more explicit, but as stated above, he had applied but not sure of effective date. His major med stopped as of end of October. I fear he is no-man's land at the moment.

If his client has applied for Part B but it isn't in effect yet then the agent should not write the app with an effective date prior to the effective date of Part B.

Exactly what I assumed was right. And on the other hand, Russ is also correct and Frank is not disagreeing with the fact that knowing effective future certain date of when Part B going into effect for someone aging-in, you can write MOO, at least putting that information on the app and leting the Part B catch up to it.

Winter Mutual of Omaha clearly asks if you have Part B and when the effective date is. It then goes on to ask "If not, when you do plan to enroll." If you are truthfully answering that you do not have Part B and their process is to look it up and confirm that you do have it before issuing the med supp, I don't see anything wrong with that and apparently their compliance folks don't either. I never would rely on what some zamboni at the carriers office says but this is a fundamental part of their application process and is built right into their application.
Don't go there or even think about stating that they do unless you know that by looking at their card or calling Medicare/SS with them or something like that..

OK all you guys, thanks for your clarification, and to quote a famous philosopher...Rodney King, in case we've forgotten famous for his quote of? "Can we all get along?"
Every carrier does have different requirements, so MOO seems to be OK with it, but there are probably others, UHC/AARP that may not be. I have not asked them directly, but as referenced you could get a zamboni (obviously a hockey fan there) to speak with that can give you some off the cuff answer.
I appreciate everyone's input. You all seem to be highly ethical and I wouldn't have it any other way. I want to and need to make money, but don't ever want to sell or compromise my principals. That's the reason I am asking and seeking direction.

 

[Frank Stastny]

There is always an inherent danger in typing as opposed to speaking.

I really wasn't looking for a fight. I was trying to compliment Alpha by saying that if he didn't know if his prospect had filed for Part B and or didn't know when Part B would be effective then in my opinion he should not write the app. I was just trying to address his specific question, not make a blanket statement.

I didn't think that I got "carried away" in my post, at the time is all made logical sense to me. My Bad!