FinalExpenseTruth
New Member
- 4
The Golden Protector Final Expense life insurance plan by Colorado Bankers Life is not a “true” final expense product in my opinion.
When it comes to this product, CBL has very stringent and ambiguous underwriting, and as a result many of the applications that you submit will unexpectedly get declined, rated (to the Graded product) or require an APS.
This is due to the fact, that although your client may truthfully be able to answer “No” to all of the questions in parts I, II, and III for the PGP I; or only answers “Yes” to one of the question in section 2 for the PGP II.
CBL has additional “situational” underwriting criteria that they rely on to determine eligibility. And, it’s not until after the fact, when the damage has already been done, that you find out.
For example, I had a client that smoked cigarettes and was taking medication(s) for asthma, and they declined him for both their standard and graded products.
This would be fine if they listed this on the application or if it was mentioned in the agent underwriting guide – but it is not! So in other words you are writing business “blind” (at least initially) for them.
When I have had the inclination to call their underwriting department, beforehand, for a risk assessment, more than half of the time my calls went unanswered (even when called repeatedly).
And, this is not the only department that I've found hard to reach. I have also, had similar experiences with their policy placement and sales support departments as well.
I will say this, it has been my experience, with regards to most of the final expense products that I've sold, you pretty much know beforehand, that if your clients can truthfully answer “No” to all of the health questions, and if everything checks out, with regards to the script check and with MIB, they will be approved. Unfortunately, I have found that this is not the case with CBL’s Golden Protector product.
As if all of this wasn’t bad enough, CBL (in my experience) takes “forever” to approve and place business that’s submitted to them (on average 4-5 days or longer).
Last but not least, they have no smartphone quoting app; and their commission advance structure is not the best, due to the fact that they pay a “capped” amount per payor as opposed to per application.
For example, let’s say you were on a 100% commission level with a 75% advance, and you wrote business on a family of 8 with an AP of $5,000.
If you placed that business with a company that has a “no cap on advance” or a “cap per application” advance structure (say $1,500), you would receive roughly $3,750 or close to it.
With CBL, they might only advance you a thousand dollars (depending on your cap amount) on that entire block of business.
Based on the above problems that I've encountered with this company and their Golden Protector product, I've given this product a failing grade.
Pros:
- Low Tobacco rates
Cons:
- Stringent & Ambiguous underwriting
- Long application approval / placement time
- Poor field underwriting / agent product guidelines
- No smartphone quoting app
- ”Lackluster” Underwriting & Sales Support
- Unfavorable Commission Advance Structure
Final Grade: F
When it comes to this product, CBL has very stringent and ambiguous underwriting, and as a result many of the applications that you submit will unexpectedly get declined, rated (to the Graded product) or require an APS.
This is due to the fact, that although your client may truthfully be able to answer “No” to all of the questions in parts I, II, and III for the PGP I; or only answers “Yes” to one of the question in section 2 for the PGP II.
CBL has additional “situational” underwriting criteria that they rely on to determine eligibility. And, it’s not until after the fact, when the damage has already been done, that you find out.
For example, I had a client that smoked cigarettes and was taking medication(s) for asthma, and they declined him for both their standard and graded products.
This would be fine if they listed this on the application or if it was mentioned in the agent underwriting guide – but it is not! So in other words you are writing business “blind” (at least initially) for them.
When I have had the inclination to call their underwriting department, beforehand, for a risk assessment, more than half of the time my calls went unanswered (even when called repeatedly).
And, this is not the only department that I've found hard to reach. I have also, had similar experiences with their policy placement and sales support departments as well.
I will say this, it has been my experience, with regards to most of the final expense products that I've sold, you pretty much know beforehand, that if your clients can truthfully answer “No” to all of the health questions, and if everything checks out, with regards to the script check and with MIB, they will be approved. Unfortunately, I have found that this is not the case with CBL’s Golden Protector product.
As if all of this wasn’t bad enough, CBL (in my experience) takes “forever” to approve and place business that’s submitted to them (on average 4-5 days or longer).
Last but not least, they have no smartphone quoting app; and their commission advance structure is not the best, due to the fact that they pay a “capped” amount per payor as opposed to per application.
For example, let’s say you were on a 100% commission level with a 75% advance, and you wrote business on a family of 8 with an AP of $5,000.
If you placed that business with a company that has a “no cap on advance” or a “cap per application” advance structure (say $1,500), you would receive roughly $3,750 or close to it.
With CBL, they might only advance you a thousand dollars (depending on your cap amount) on that entire block of business.
Based on the above problems that I've encountered with this company and their Golden Protector product, I've given this product a failing grade.
Pros:
- Low Tobacco rates
Cons:
- Stringent & Ambiguous underwriting
- Long application approval / placement time
- Poor field underwriting / agent product guidelines
- No smartphone quoting app
- ”Lackluster” Underwriting & Sales Support
- Unfavorable Commission Advance Structure
Final Grade: F
