RNA Vs Foresters

[TDFnCali]

Ive read several times on here that its easy to replace Foresters, and a lot of agents really dont like them. But the only reason that Im aware of is cause they aren't American (which I could careless).
Now Im not talking about their confusing app or PHI or lousy CS...it seems there's a deeper reason why agents say they are easy to replace, but I dont know what it is!

Both RNA & Foresters a both Fraternal, so that cant be it....but I think I've heard fraternals arent under the state GF, but no one ever says anything about RNA? And Foresters has been around over 100yrs & have a A rating, just like RNA.


So what is it Im missing?

 

[Newby]

Ive read several times on here that its easy to replace Foresters, and a lot of agents really dont like them. But the only reason that Im aware of is cause they aren't American (which I could careless).
Now Im not talking about their confusing app or PHI or lousy CS...it seems there's a deeper reason why agents say they are easy to replace, but I dont know what it is!

Both RNA & Foresters a both Fraternal, so that cant be it....but I think I've heard fraternals arent under the state GF, but no one ever says anything about RNA? And Foresters has been around over 100yrs & have a A rating, just like RNA.

So what is it Im missing?

I don't keep up with Foresters anymore but back a few years ago they had a critical illness benefit of $4,000 built in to the plan. The benefit didn't kick in until the certificate was 24-months old and that feature canceled on the insured's 70th birthday. There was a real aggressive sales group that used to blow through our area and sold Foresters policies. They made a huge deal about that "free" benefit.

When I would come in behind them I would make a big deal about being local. Then I would have the insured tell me about their Foresters coverage. They would always talk about that great CI benefit and I would throw their agent under the bus if the insured was age 68 or more. These agents blow through town over-promising and under-delivering. That would always make the insured mad that they fell for BS.

At that point they want a local agent that would give them straight information and not BS them.

That's it from the consumer's point of view. From an agent's point of view they were the worst customer service I ever dealt with and by far the worst claim experience I could ever imagine.

Now that their rates nd underwriting are less attractive than they used to be...what reason would an agent want to offer them any more?

 

[Agentguy5]

I'm actually replacing a 3 year old Foresters policy with an Oxford policy this week... The client will be paying about $1 more a month for the same coverage but he gets to pocket over $500 bucks for the surrender... Nice!!!

 

[TDFnCali]

I'm actually replacing a 3 year old Foresters policy with an Oxford policy this week... The client will be paying about $1 more a month for the same coverage but he gets to pocket over $500 bucks for the surrender... Nice!!!

That ^^ has nothing to do with specifically Foresters, your client is just cash strapped!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I don't keep up with Foresters anymore but back a few years ago they had a critical illness benefit of $4,000 built in to the plan. The benefit didn't kick in until the certificate was 24-months old and that feature canceled on the insured's 70th birthday. There was a real aggressive sales group that used to blow through our area and sold Foresters policies. They made a huge deal about that "free" benefit.

When I would come in behind them I would make a big deal about being local. Then I would have the insured tell me about their Foresters coverage. They would always talk about that great CI benefit and I would throw their agent under the bus if the insured was age 68 or more. These agents blow through town over-promising and under-delivering. That would always make the insured mad that they fell for BS.

At that point they want a local agent that would give them straight information and not BS them.

That's it from the consumer's point of view. From an agent's point of view they were the worst customer service I ever dealt with and by far the worst claim experience I could ever imagine.

Now that their rates nd underwriting are less attractive than they used to be...what reason would an agent want to offer them any more?

It seemed when agents like NFL (and others) mentioned their reasoning it had more to do with legality or something! Or maybe not & I just took it that way, and its just their lousy CS and payout times.

 

[jacobtn]

the fact that Foresters is not state insured does not help someone to replace them, unless they are ignoring the insurance regulation that prohibits using the state guaranty fund to induce someone to buy a policy... we aren't supposed to even bring up the existence of such a fund, unless someone asks what happens if an insurance co. goes out of business.

Also I am the first one to replace a policy if it is right for the client, mainly if I am replacing UL that is increasing in cost, term coverage, etc. Tread lightly if replacing policies that are over 2 yrs old (out of contestable period), unless the client is super healthy and there is a very clear benefit.

 

[sshafran]

Ive read several times on here that its easy to replace Foresters, and a lot of agents really dont like them. But the only reason that Im aware of is cause they aren't American (which I could careless).
Now Im not talking about their confusing app or PHI or lousy CS...it seems there's a deeper reason why agents say they are easy to replace, but I dont know what it is!

Both RNA & Foresters a both Fraternal, so that cant be it....but I think I've heard fraternals arent under the state GF, but no one ever says anything about RNA? And Foresters has been around over 100yrs & have a A rating, just like RNA.


So what is it Im missing?

I still like and sell Foresters when appropriate. I think Newby's post speaks volumes about selling the policy for what it is and not focusing on the "fringe benefits." i.e. When I called Foresters earlier today the guy there asked me if I needed any new brochures (who uses brochures? ) and to be "sure to tell my clients about the member benefits" I sorta rolled my eyes... Sure, I'll tell them about that stuff, but after they buy the life insurance.

BNTR's blog put it well - clients don't really care about all the "specs" of the company. They care about the best solution.

In short, if Foresters has a policy which will serve the purpose, then sell it. But, be better than your competition (see blog) so that your policy will not be replaced.

 

[Newby]

I still like and sell Foresters when appropriate. I think Newby's post speaks volumes about selling the policy for what it is and not focusing on the "fringe benefits." i.e. When I called Foresters earlier today the guy there asked me if I needed any new brochures (who uses brochures? ) and to be "sure to tell my clients about the member benefits" I sorta rolled my eyes... Sure, I'll tell them about that stuff, but after they buy the life insurance.

BNTR's blog put it well - clients don't really care about all the "specs" of the company. They care about the best solution.

In short, if Foresters has a policy which will serve the purpose, then sell it. But, be better than your competition (see blog) so that your policy will not be replaced.

Foresters won't have a "policy" which serves a purpose. They don't sell policies. They sell certificates.

 

[nfl72]

stated by agentguy5

"I'm actually replacing a 3 year old Foresters policy with an Oxford policy this week... The client will be paying about $1 more a month for the same coverage but he gets to pocket over $500 bucks for the surrender... Nice!!!"


something doesnt sound right with this. the numbers dont't seem to add up Of the top of my head I would expect his new payment to be more than $1.00 per month higher. Three years ago Foresters was priced about the same as Oxford.

You might want to keep good track of that replacement also. If the agent getting replaced finds out about it one would think he will go back and try and resell things. I would like to think if it was my policy being replaced I could save it with the benfits he is losing the new contestability period. But in this day and age $500 can speak very loudly especially if you don't have it!

 

[sshafran]

Foresters won't have a "policy" which serves a purpose. They don't sell policies. They sell certificates.

It's late. We both know it's a certificate. I apologize for the quick answer.

We also both know that there is very little substantive difference (especially from the client's perspective).

 

[nfl72]

as stated by Scott

"We also both know that there is very little substantive difference (especially from the client's perspective)."


yet we have agents who want to use that as a primary reason not to sell Foresters product. Fear tactics are used by the weak feeble agents whom have nothing else to hang their hat on.

That being said from time to time we all do it!

------------------------------------
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Its almost like convincing someone today to not buy a Toyota because they had an unintended accereration problem, which they in fact never had.

I sent a friend in to look at a Camry, which he did but when he went to the Chevy store they used that a a main reason not to buy a Toyota. They couldn't sell the Chevy on its own merits so they resorted to unproven falsehoods to make their inferior product appear to be better.