Senior Life Insurance Company... Any One Know About Them?

kennethbroyles

Guru
100+ Post Club
285
A friend of mine asked me about " Senior Insurance Life Insurance Company", because he lost a FE sale due to underwriting and price/ month.
I had not heard of them, and told him I would ask here. Before I did, I looked them up; do they have a " captive agent" marketing system? What is the story and others experience with this company?
 
Last edited:
A friend of mine asked me about " Senior Insurance Life Insurance Company", because he lost a FE sale due to underwriting and price/ month.
I had not heard of them, and told him I would ask here. Before I did, I looked them up; do they have a " captive agent" marketing system? What is the story and others experience with this company?

He shouldn't have any problem beating them if he has a good selection of companies himself and knows what he is doing.

But he can contract with them if he wants to. I don't think they are captive. A couple of recruiters are here on the forum.
 
A friend of mine asked me about " Senior Insurance Life Insurance Company", because he lost a FE sale due to underwriting and price/ month.
I had not heard of them, and told him I would ask here. Before I did, I looked them up; do they have a " captive agent" marketing system? What is the story and others experience with this company?

Hmm...Underwriting I can understand. SL is very liberal. I always tell agents what we CAN'T cover. It's easier that way. Lol But, SL is about middle of the road. I did a price comparison with them and the most popular carriers out there and they fall about middle of the road. In some cases they actually are a little cheaper depending on the product. So, it depends on the product(s) & carrier(s) your friend is using.

SL is not captive as a company. But, some of the agency's and RD's may work it like a captive group. It all depends on the RD & group.

Our group is not captive but it all comes down to does an agent want our leads or not. We look at everyone case by case.

Hope this helps?
 
i reseached them, TD above has a team, and so does theinsuranceman, talk to them both. i don't think you could go wrong with either one. they both are long time members. i talked with greg, the insuranceman, he pointed me to a group closer to where i live. they have a good selling system, the commission levels have me on the fence.
 
i reseached them, TD above has a team, and so does theinsuranceman, talk to them both. i don't think you could go wrong with either one. they both are long time members. i talked with greg, the insuranceman, he pointed me to a group closer to where i live. they have a good selling system, the commission levels have me on the fence.

Do you have to become a "licensed field underwriter" or can you be honest and call yourself an insurance agent?

Rick
 
Now don't go down that road. I say tomato, you say tomatoe. I don't think a client could care what you call your self. The product has only a few health questions. the insuranceman, or TD would be better at explaining the product.
 
Now don't go down that road. I say tomato, you say tomatoe. I don't think a client could care what you call your self. The product has only a few health questions. the insuranceman, or TD would be better at explaining the product.


It's not a matter of semantics. It's a matter of saying it to deceive. If you are OK with that it says a bit about you.
 
This whole thing could be put to rest if Greg will simply call his state insurance commissioner's office and ask the question. I would accept thier answer as the correct answer.

From MY conversation with them it is OK to say "I am a licensed insurance agent who does the initial field underwriting for XYZ insurance company."

It's deceitful and NOT acceptable to say "I am an insurance underwriter or field underwriter."

It's a HUGE red flag to say "I'm a licensed field underwriter." Totally bogus as there is no such license.
 
This whole thing could be put to rest if Greg will simply call his state insurance commissioner's office and ask the question. I would accept thier answer as the correct answer.

From MY conversation with them it is OK to say "I am a licensed insurance agent who does the initial field underwriting for XYZ insurance company."

It's deceitful and NOT acceptable to say "I am an insurance underwriter or field underwriter."

It's a HUGE red flag to say "I'm a licensed field underwriter." Totally bogus as there is no such license.

Newby, I called the NCDOI and here's what they said: There's no LICENSE for a field underwriter, only a license for an agent.

However, the term "field underwriter" is acceptable, just don't say "LICENSED field underwriter" since there is no license. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
It's not a matter of semantics. It's a matter of saying it to deceive. If you are OK with that it says a bit about you.

Not to deceive. Just going by the definition of "licensed field underwriter".

As per that definition: An initial decision by the insurance agent in the field about a prospective insured, based on whether they may meet the underwriting standards of the insurer.

Here's another definition:

field underwriting:
judgment decision by the insurance agent concerning whether or not to submit an application. The decision is based on the agent's familiarity with the insurance company's underwriting requirements for standard



Source: http://www.allbusiness.com/glossaries/field-underwriting/4959032-1.html#ixzz1XNSwQLAz
 
Last edited:
Using the term field underwriter is simply to avoid saying insurance agent.

Either a person is ashamed of their profession or they are dishonest. I'm guessing both.

Rick
 
Back
Top