Selling C and F After 2020

There is. If COLA doesn't rise, the Part B premium cannot rise. Which is why people on Part B prior to 12/31/15 are paying $104.90, 1/1/16 and beyond are paying $122.90.

I think they actually had to be signed up by November 1st. And the Part B premium is $121.80.
 
UHC and BCBS told us they were coming after our licenses with their lobbyist buddies if we don't stop selling G over F. Apparently they think we're "fearmongering", I guess that's how they would describe giving opinions based in fact and using the argument about how J went away in 2010, the block of business closed, and the rates jumped up. They were pimping C and F so hard, the money trail became so evident.

Shout out to the agents that spoke up for us "rogue agents" as they referred to us as.
 
Scott, you are correct. If COLA doesn't increase neither do B premiums. Still doesn't stop them from crabbing about living on a fixed income and how everything else has gone up.

I got that at a mini-reunion a few years ago. Have 3 cousins, all older than me, that celebrate birthdays within 6 weeks of each other. One of them mentioned the no COLA and the others chimed in.

I just kept my mouth shut.
 
I took my notes from the meeting and put them on the SMS blog here:

https://sms-university.com/blog/selling-plan-c-f-2020/

One big issue the panel had was of insurance agents using the tactics listed on the blog (under Rumors and Rates). The one panel member from the DOI said they are taking this very seriously and any complaints will be reviewed and then stated the sections of the DOI guidelines that give them the power to revoke an insurance license. Doesn't sound like they are too happy about agents scaring seniors with unsubstantiated claims of rate increases.

They weren't happy with agents NOT going to push Plan F anymore either. There was a serious agenda in that meeting and everyone paying attention knew it. Follow THAT money trail.

----------

From the link above:

They displayed the following on a slide saying there is no evidence to support any of the following:

Plan F rates will never stabilize or remain low if there are no new policies being sold to healthy enrollees


SERIOUSLY? How does that work? The pool is going to get older and sicker. Subsequently claims loss will rise. Then premiums will rise. Am I missing something here?

I don't sell to people trying to move (except the MOO people who are calling me right now after getting their rate increase), but I certainly discuss the rating pools when selling to T65's and why I think G is the better choice, long term. And now I can get fined for it?

Your rational statements would have fell completely on irrational deaf ears in that meeting. I felt like I was in the twilight zone.
 
Your rational statements would have fell completely on irrational deaf ears in that meeting. I felt like I was in the twilight zone.

I get UHC (since, well, they are UHC and they can't be bothered to offer G), but why is BCBS having a fit? They offer G. In TX, the premium differential is almost identical to the Part B.

And awesome news CJ, I've always wanted to be rogue..... ;)
 
From what I got at the session was they do not want agents to, as someone else mention, fear-monger seniors away from Plan F.

Naturally no one will know what the rates will do, as I am sure it will also depend on if they create new pools or blocks of business for Plan G or other plans after or just before 2020 hits.

Now, I do see the DOI/CMS/Compliance point that there are rouge agents, but there are also bad agents that will use the information incorrectly and scare people into decisions. And most of the time, rules and regulations are designed with those agents in mind.

A topic that is hot right now is intent. What was the intent of the agent in the appointment? Was it to take care of the client or only to sell them something to make a commission? That is a view a lot of compliance people are looking at when determining the violation and how to respond.
 
I get UHC (since, well, they are UHC and they can't be bothered to offer G), but why is BCBS having a fit? They offer G. In TX, the premium differential is almost identical to the Part B.

And awesome news CJ, I've always wanted to be rogue..... ;)

I am guessing for the same reason some Ins companies come in with very low rates only to retire that block of buis after x number of years and play the shell game, I am assuming there is big money in the closed block
 
UHC and BCBS told us they were coming after our licenses with their lobbyist buddies if we don't stop selling G over F. Apparently they think we're "fearmongering", I guess that's how they would describe giving opinions based in fact and using the argument about how J went away in 2010, the block of business closed, and the rates jumped up. They were pimping C and F so hard, the money trail became so evident.

Shout out to the agents that spoke up for us "rogue agents" as they referred to us as.



is this about agents replacing their plan F members with another carrier's plan G ,N etc? ? Well here's the thing is that both UHC and BCBS policyholders can switch to any plan they want without underwriting and still maintain original entry age band rates.

For example in Fl. if you come across a 69 year old UHC plan F prospect and replace them with plan N the premium you offer should be lower than the UHC age 65 entry age of 135.00 they can get with a phone call to customer service.Even then it's questionable if its suitable because prospect would be giving up their entry age band rates to start new coverage at higher age band affecting premium paid on future increases.


i know that UHC lost some plan J policyholders including a couple of my clients in 2010 due to fear mongering agents so I really cant blame for being proactive.BTW I have many clients still on UHC plan J in Fl. and their premiums have not gone up anymore then plan F which has always been less then 3% on annual increases.
 
Back
Top