Trial Right

[LostDollar]

What he said was that a company would rather enroll someone in a plan N with underwriting rather than a GI plan F.

It doesn’t take much to understand this at all. Which client would most likely have lower claims? Plan N obviously.

I don't see how that necessarily follows for a person with cancer, but I don't want to get accused of arguing again so I'm stopping.

I truly appreciate you being kind enough to answer a couple of times.
thanks.
LD

Edit: and maybe that's another of those situations where I have to be selling policies rather than just reading a rulebook in order to understand the nuances.

 

[MBSC]

A company would rather have a fully underwritten plan N than a GI plan F to a guy with cancer...

Thanks Chazm. There lies the crux of my question. Op stated that an insurance company would prefer the plan that gives them less premium revenue over the plan that gives them more premium revenue when the company is enrolling a person sick with cancer.

I interpreted the sentence to be that the Plan N enrollee is healthy (fully underwritten) and the guy with cancer had to take the GI Plan F road. An insurance company would rather collect 'X' in Plan N premiums and receive no claims than collect '2X' in Plan F premiums and pay '5X' in cancer claims.

 

[LostDollar]

I interpreted the sentence to be that the Plan N enrollee is healthy (fully underwritten) and the guy with cancer had to take the GI Plan F road. An insurance company would rather collect 'X' in Plan N premiums and receive no claims than collect '2X' in Plan F premiums and pay '5X' in cancer claims.

I'm honored. We don't see you very often.

I bet you are good at what you do. One incorrect interpretation and the whole processing chain for a bill goes south. What you said makes perfect sense. I could not get beyond the sentence meaning the enrollee in both plans had cancer.

I could have come back to this thread every week for a year and not seen what you said in regard to the interpretations. Nor would I have seen the way op was using the statement. I was taking his post (#7) to be an expansion of his original post rather than as his response to my viewing his originally stated problem through the lens of trial right 4 instead of trial right 5.

Thanks again for the help.

 

[LostDollar]

That's a bit brutal.

Perhaps we are seeing the real Todd in action here. That post is basically a repeat of another he made recently. If you want to see really brutal, look at my thread in the 1K club.

The two recent posts are causing me to reconsider some of my imo choice comments but they do add dimension to a recent comment Todd made about being surprised that he still had any carriers left that allowed him to be contracted with them.

As I'm typing, one other comment comes to mind, I'll give you the back story and make the comment to Todd. I had Hank Trisler's No Bull Selling out recently to quote the author and title in another thread. I had randomly opened the book to what might be the most hilarious story in the whole book, at the conclusion of a chapter about cold (telephone) calling. (He didn't do door to door, he said I'd have to buy you or goillini's books to learn how to do that.)

And another forum member said something to the effect that I asked questions or criticized questions when I did not have the answer to the one asked.

So, here we go..........

 

[LostDollar]

You just don't get it do you? If you want to ask questions all the time why don't you do it in the "Ask the Agents" section like most non-licensed consumers?

Todd,
I already gave you two answers to that question, but another comes to mind.

Don't cold callers use targeted data lists? (And if I interrupted your lunch, it's your fault, not mine.)

 

[Newby]

I know that age has an effect on the Medigap premium. Does the underwriting or GI business place the beneficiary in a higher premium category than a newly eligible beneficiary of the same age?

For example I know that one reason agents sell a plan N vs a plan F is because a plan N is often lower priced. But if underwriting for a cancer risk raises a plan N premium, reducing the N to F differential, it seems like the benefit of a plan N to the beneficiary would start to disappear, again particularly for someone with cancer who would have an increased likelihood of provider visits.

edit:
Thanks for the time you took with the answer you gave.
Also, I apologize for being such an a$$ awhile back when you tried to talk to me about plan F.

Underwriting for a risk will lower the premium not raise it. I don’t understand your question. If two Med sups start out equal but one must accept all health condition and the second rejects and one with recent or current cancer, heart condition, chronic conditions and upcoming surgeries, which do you think will be exposed to more claims? Which would have higher rate increases?

Agents who understand these things would never put a healthy person into a Guaranteed issue plan. In all my years I can count the people I have put on a plan F on one hand UNLESS the GI was the only thing they could qualify for.

Plan N is always underwritten except for new to part B and exposes the insured to more co-pays than the other plans. So it has a healthier base of people and always lower rate increases than Plan F.

The majority of my customers have always chosen Plan G which is what I recommend.

 

[LostDollar]

Underwriting for a risk will lower the premium not raise it. I don’t understand your question. If two Med sups start out equal but one must accept all health condition and the second rejects and one with recent or current cancer, heart condition, chronic conditions and upcoming surgeries, which do you think will be exposed to more claims? Which would have higher rate increases?

Agents who understand these things would never put a healthy person into a Guaranteed issue plan. In all my years I can count the people I have put on a plan F on one hand UNLESS the GI was the only thing they could qualify for.

Plan N is always underwritten except for new to part B and exposes the insured to more co-pays than the other plans. So it has a healthier base of people and always lower rate increases than Plan F.

The majority of my customers have always chosen Plan G which is what I recommend.

Thanks Newby.
Op made this statement:

A company would rather have a fully underwritten plan N than a GI plan F to a guy with cancer...

It did not make sense to me and op would not explain his reason(s) for making it. Since I don't sell the plans, I have no knowledge of carrier pricing structures and was asking the underwriting type questions because I thought the rationale for op's statement might lie there.

What MBSC pointed out above was an issue in interpretation.

I was reading the statement this way:
[A company would rather have a fully underwritten plan N than a GI plan F] [to a guy with cancer...]
because I was taking the post as an extension of his original post.

What MBSC pointed out above was this interpretation, which I was unable to see because of an incomplete sentence:
[A company would rather have a fully underwritten plan N (to a healthy enrollee)] [than a GI plan F to a guy with cancer...]

I understand the second interpretation. I was just unable to see it.

 

[goillini52]

I understand the second interpretation. I was just unable to see it.

That's because you didn't have your glasses on.

 

[LostDollar]

That's because you didn't have your glasses on.

You laugh.
My son was just trying to show me how to get a picture into a text on my phone. I had two pairs (of glasses) on (at the same time) to see a paper clip icon!

 

[somarco]

copy of the Disenrollment letter.

Had a guy a couple of years back. Age 83 or so and finally wanted to retire. Covered by group and A + B since turning 65.

Group was primary.

Had a lot of trouble getting the disenrollment letter. Running short of time. Submitted to Aetna as an underwritten case. Figured he had a 50% chance of being approved.

They said no.

Finally got the letter about a week before his last day on the job. Submitted new app. Aetna didn't like the wording because it did not say involuntary loss of coverage.

Had to get a new letter.

Letter arrived after the proposed effective date but still within the guidelines for getting all the information in.

Big PITA.

That was probably the last GI app I wrote.

Got 50% commission.

Right before Aetna cut GI comp to almost zero.

Did I say GI is a PITA?