Upcoming TIP interview with JD

[rousemark]

Looks like they were found guilty of nothing.

But they did enter into a "plea bargain" for some reason. I guess they just wanted to pay their "fair share" to the SEC out of the goodness of their heart.

 

[NSRH]

Yelp... Some people write fraternals and then use the assessment clause to replace them..

https://insurance-forums.com/commun...-foresters-equitable.53408/page-3#post-701711

And as we all know, assessments are true for 100% of Fraternals, regardless if the certificate says it or not.

However, some are simply not interested in the truth, they will continue to double talk and look foolish.

 

[rousemark]

And as we all know, assessments are true for 100% of Fraternals, regardless if the certificate says it or not.

However, some are simply not interested in the truth, they will continue to double talk and look foolish.

I have never seen one in TN that does not state in somewhere in the certificate. You have soem agents tell people that "it has never happened" and then when proof is offered of a fraternal doing it, they sue all sorts of convoluted arguments to deny it.

 

[NSRH]

Someone would have went to jail means virtually nothing to me lol deceptive practices from the top down isn’t exactly great publicity but I see your point. This was also in 2006 so I imagine most or all are gone by this point. Also, why you all acting like they were only going after veterans? Werent they targeted by other service members?

You need to push the Newby politician button and talk your way outta this

No doubt leadership has changed, thats a fact.

And yes, the issue arose when 1099 contractors, who were also in the military, used their rank to coerce their subordinates into a product.

Although the carrier did not admit guilt, they paid a fine and moved on.

No one was found guilty, thats my only point.

 

[NSRH]

I have never seen one in TN that does not state in somewhere in the certificate. You have soem agents tell people that "it has never happened" and then when proof is offered of a fraternal doing it, they sue all sorts of convoluted arguments to deny it.

Exactly.

There are even some fraternals that deceive clients by putting the word "policy" on their certificates.

Thats low.

 

[Thedude]

Rousemark!! What a find!!!! I didn’t read those wow

That’s gold

 

[NSRH]

Well I stand corrected then. So you were the number one producer in the country for a decent sized final expense company and you aren’t making huge income? Hmmmm? Interesting.

And I had no idea those agents from your old lead business were all made whole. That was rude of them to not come back and update the threads if none of them actually lost money.

If these things are true then those agents really had nothing to complain about. Don’t you hate that? When people make false accusations about you?

Scott, again, my income has no barring on this conversation. But since you keep bringing it up, Ill make considerably less this year than years past since I just spent seven million dollars to purchase a mall and make it into a call center. Does that answer your question?

And honestly, some of the best publicity for me is when I am attacked and forced to prove my position on things. Some of the best recruiting months NS has ever had is when you and your gang pulled these stunts a couple of years ago.

In one month we brought on over 50 agents. That was a record for us at the time, and you played a big roll in that, so thank you.

 

[NSRH]

Rousemark!! What a find!!!! I didn’t read those wow

That’s gold

Just another example of double talk. Nothing really that new from FEX.

 

[NSRH]

But they did enter into a "plea bargain" for some reason. I guess they just wanted to pay their "fair share" to the SEC out of the goodness of their heart.

Sometimes its easier to settle than to spend more money to prove a point.

 

[goillini52]

Looks like they were found guilty of nothing.