- 19,635
I like them, too. Did you ever write them when you didn't have to talk to an operator?
Unscrupulous Agents...
- Thread starter Rearden
- Start date
I like them, too. Did you ever write them when you didn't have to talk to an operator?
Back in the day when no one did a PHI, Independent Life and Accident came out with a 2 year ROP plan. The local district manger announced it to his agents, "Now, we can legally do what we have always done".. meaning they had always been sending apps in as, "No, No, Never, None, had the flu in '51". Then, if the client died within 2 years, the claim would be contested and the premiums returned.
Since Dave says the lady didn't object to a ROP, The AMCON agent may have coached the insured telling her that it would ROP if she died during the first 2 years but it would be cheaper than an actual ROP policy. Even, if that is the case, if the agent knowingly falsified an application, he should be severely disciplined.
I am wondering if Monumental isn't going to have this problem since they don't do a PHI?
Since Dave says the lady didn't object to a ROP, The AMCON agent may have coached the insured telling her that it would ROP if she died during the first 2 years but it would be cheaper than an actual ROP policy. Even, if that is the case, if the agent knowingly falsified an application, he should be severely disciplined.
I am wondering if Monumental isn't going to have this problem since they don't do a PHI?
- 19,635
The person would have to be in on the lie with AmCon. If they were coached, they were well coached.
Not only does AmCon ask the questions and person has to answer "No" in order to be approved, they pause and want an answer at each comma.
For example the question about CHF, cardio, parkinsons? Only has one box for the agent to check No. But, on the phone inerview the person would have to say "No" three times to that question.
I'm not saying it didn't happen exactly like that. I am saying that, if it did, this lady is not an innocent victim. It's still wrong if it happened that way, but it wasn't just an "unscrupulous agent" involved in the charade.
While they don't do a PHI, they do run MIB and prescription checks. The OP was said AmCon wasn't running either of these, which seems crazy. I'm assuming if somebody lies about a condition on the app, then they usually will be caught when the RX and MIB checks comes back.
I had this happen once where a guy told me he had wasn't taking any meds or recieving treatment for cirhosis. Turned out he must have been lying about something b/c MonLife reduced it to graded from standard.
MIB, RX, Auto Black Boxes, Cell Phone GPS, etc.... Big Brother is watching and knows our every move or, if not now, soon will.
stated by JDeasy
"Not only does AmCon ask the questions and person has to answer "No" in order to be approved, they pause and want an answer at each comma.
For example the question about CHF, cardio, parkinsons? Only has one box for the agent to check No. But, on the phone inerview the person would have to say "No" three times to that question"
The only thing I ever noticed about AmCon was how fast and easy there phi is compared to others. Most of them are southern talking laidback people who seem very forgiving and understanding if there is any confusion on the clients part.
I do notice my persistancy rating with them is much lower than Foresters. Probably becasue the people I generaly send to AmCon are on lots of prescriptions and just not as stable of a client, where Foresters gets the cream of the crop.
"Not only does AmCon ask the questions and person has to answer "No" in order to be approved, they pause and want an answer at each comma.
For example the question about CHF, cardio, parkinsons? Only has one box for the agent to check No. But, on the phone inerview the person would have to say "No" three times to that question"
The only thing I ever noticed about AmCon was how fast and easy there phi is compared to others. Most of them are southern talking laidback people who seem very forgiving and understanding if there is any confusion on the clients part.
I do notice my persistancy rating with them is much lower than Foresters. Probably becasue the people I generaly send to AmCon are on lots of prescriptions and just not as stable of a client, where Foresters gets the cream of the crop.
- Thread starter
- #17
- 5,304
I got the policy replaced with a Foresters Modified plan. Apparently she felt she'd been "had" after I showed her the AmCon app about diabetes and CHF.
Thanks JD!
Thanks JD!
Up until a few months ago I did most of my policies with AmCon and Foresters and on a few ocassions I found better prices on the AmCon over Foresters when dealing with Graded or Modified. Not sure but I think it was dealing with a smoker. I must admit it was not expected.
It also might have been because of Diabetes. Foresters is not so tough on them
It also might have been because of Diabetes. Foresters is not so tough on them
- 19,635
I'm glad you got the business, but that lady didn't just see those questions for the first time when you showed them to her. She was asked those questions twice. Once by the agent and once by the phone interviewer. The phone call is recorded and they even tell the person at the beginning that, "if you don't understand a question, ask me to repeat it".
She can pretend that she thinks she she has been "had" all she wants. Unless she doesn't remember and that's a whole new problem.
I don't know that her situation is improved with a new policy. If the answers were wrong on the AmCon her beneficiary would have gotten everything she paid if she had died in the contestability period. Now, if she dies in the contestability period her beneficiary is gonna get everything paid plus 10%.
So, she is 10% of whatever paid better off. How much more is she paying for that 10%?
I ran into one a few years ago where the agent had "clean sheeted" the app on a company that did not do an MIB or Script check. She was on oxygen and was when the app was taken. She had it for 23 months. I certainly didn't replace the policy I did have her call MoO to get additional coverage.
That lady died about a year later. What if I had busted that agent on the old policy? technically I should have. In reality it's never bothered me that I didn't.
Similar threads
