Med Supp Signed 6/15. Approved. Effective 6/1.

sshafran

Guru
1000 Post Club
3,441
NC
I didn't even know this was possible.

I've been selling supps since 2010. I never even thought to ask if someone signs (underwritten) on 6/15 if we could get a 6/1 effective date. But UHC (evidently) allows this.

Am I slow, or is this just not highly publicized? (If I'm slow, and ya'll knew this already, then ok, I can take it....:D)

Any other carriers allow this? :biggrin:
 
I didn't even know this was possible.

I've been selling supps since 2010. I never even thought to ask if someone signs (underwritten) on 6/15 if we could get a 6/1 effective date. But UHC (evidently) allows this.

Am I slow, or is this just not highly publicized? (If I'm slow, and ya'll knew this already, then ok, I can take it....:D)

Any other carriers allow this? :biggrin:

Why would anyone want to do that?
 
Did they ask for a 6/1 effective? Or did UHC automatically give it to them?

I imagine that carriers would have to allow some flexibility, right? I've had a couple cases where my apps were stuck in underwriting for a couple weeks but they honored the original requested effective date.
 
Did they ask for a 6/1 effective? Or did UHC automatically give it to them?

I imagine that carriers would have to allow some flexibility, right? I've had a couple cases where my apps were stuck in underwriting for a couple weeks but they honored the original requested effective date.

You are speaking of a different situation. He had an app signed on the 15th and effective 15 days prior. Only reason a client would want to do that is if they had a claim that needed paid which I doubt any company would do.
 
It may have been a mistake, I do know UHC will allow and effective date before app is received as long as signature date was prior to effective. I have had a number of apps signed and dropped in the mail to UHC on the last day of the month and still get a 1st effective

However they are supposed to be at least signed by the effective date, This may have just been an oversight
 
I take it this is a paper app. I don't know of any carrier e-app that allows post-dated apps.
 
Why would anyone want to do that?

He had 2 doctor appointments this month - he hates bill and loves Plan F.

----------

I take it this is a paper app. I don't know of any carrier e-app that allows post-dated apps.

Correct, paper app............20 characters...

----------

It may have been a mistake, I do know UHC will allow and effective date before app is received as long as signature date was prior to effective. I have had a number of apps signed and dropped in the mail to UHC on the last day of the month and still get a 1st effective

However they are supposed to be at least signed by the effective date, This may have just been an oversight

Nope. No mistake. They allow this for anyone.

It came up because this client paid his premium manually and allowed it to lapse last year but quickly got it reinstated. So, when he let it lapse again, he was hoping to just be able to get it reinstated again. So we did a 3-way call with UHC and they said, "No, we need a new app, but you can get it 6/1."

Since I was on the line, I quickly said, "You mean 7/1?"

No - 6/1.

Then, the underwriter had a quick question so they reached out to me before issuing it and I clarified with him - Will you really allow 6/1? He said, "Yes" and they issued it.
 
When I need a retro effective date in California, I can use Blue Shield of California. Only new to Medicare.

----------




Claims exceeding premium.

That is the only advantage and am surprised the company would pay it. I finally found something that I didn't know. Now I know everything...
 
Back
Top