Why Sell Cancer and Critical Illness Insurance?

[smokin goose]

This thread might answer some of your questions. http://www.insurance-forums.net/forum/individual-health-insurance-forum/10-reasons-selling-cancer-insurance-t68422.html As far as payroll groups, I have never enjoyed that market even though I have written some groups. However, you are mistaken as to what percentage of people who have this coverage through their company. More than 80% of the workers do not have this type of coverage avaiable through their employer.. That leaves the individual market wide open. Years ago a friend of mine made a very good living working main street writing individual bank draft business. His goal was one in the morning and one in the afternoon.. That is 500 policies per year. The average premium these days is around $500 so if a person did that today on a 60% contract they would be producing $250K in premium or $150K gross commissions. The second yr, the gross commissions (not factoring lapses) would be $187500. Most companies will be in the 50%-65% range on first year and 12%-15% lifetime renewals. I am leaning more and more toward Washington National as they have both expense incurred and lump sum plans. 10 Yr. look-back for previous cancer on the expense incurred and only a 5 yr look-back on the lump sum. Plans in most states have an ROP option.

I like the sound of an ROP option. Is that on the lump sum or schedule of benefits? And is that an optional rider?

 

[AllenChicago]

QUOTE=rousemark;712299- "Scott you are not reading that correctly.. but maybe this makes it a little more plain.. 41% of all Americans will develop cancer during their lifetime. That is approximately 33% of all women and 50% of all men (1 in 2).."

Those statistics include ages 0 to 120. Cancer/Critical Illness plans are rarely written on children and young adults. I've never sold Cancer-only plans, but don't all Critical Illness policies terminate between age 65 and 75?

 

[rousemark]

QUOTE=rousemark;712299- "Scott you are not reading that correctly.. but maybe this makes it a little more plain.. 41% of all Americans will develop cancer during their lifetime. That is approximately 33% of all women and 50% of all men (1 in 2).."

Those statistics include ages 0 to 120. Cancer/Critical Illness plans are rarely written on children and young adults. I've never sold Cancer-only plans, but don't all Critical Illness policies terminate between age 65 and 75?

No.. In fact WN issues thier CI to age 85.. Children are covered on the family plans and I have written many young adults over the years. Have paid claims on people of all ages.

----------

I like the sound of an ROP option. Is that on the lump sum or schedule of benefits? And is that an optional rider?

It is available with WN on both type of plans... It is an optional rider.

 

[somarco]

I ran across this book a few days ago. Quite interesting, especially the charts towards the back.

 

[AllenChicago]

I ran across this book a few days ago. Quite interesting, especially the charts towards the back.

That is an excellent study Somarco. Very useful for sales and for general info. Saved to the cloud for ongoing reference. Thanks!

One thing we as agents need to be careful of is how companies define cancers for triggering benefits. Some say "life threatening" cancers. My dad has prostate cancer, but the doctor says its not life-threatening. I imagine some companies would pay benefits, and other wouldn't, in his situation.

 

[somarco]

Lewis has a better handle on cancer plans than anyone, but yes, you are correct. Many of the plans will only pay a full benefit if there is internal cancer. Others will pay a reduced benefit for carcinoma in situ or non-invasive skin cancers.

I can't say I have seen one define cancer as "life threatening" but Lewis may have some insight on that.

The CI plans seem to have more wiggle room than cancer policies. Some will pay for a heart attack but only if there is damage to the heart muscle. Others will pay a reduced benefit for TIA vs. full benefit for stroke.

 

[rousemark]

Lewis has a better handle on cancer plans than anyone, but yes, you are correct. Many of the plans will only pay a full benefit if there is internal cancer. Others will pay a reduced benefit for carcinoma in situ or non-invasive skin cancers.

I can't say I have seen one define cancer as "life threatening" but Lewis may have some insight on that.

The CI plans seem to have more wiggle room than cancer policies. Some will pay for a heart attack but only if there is damage to the heart muscle. Others will pay a reduced benefit for TIA vs. full benefit for stroke.

The only coverages I have personally seen that use the life threatnig deffinition are the Crtical Illness accelarated benefit riders on life policies.

 

[AllenChicago]

The CI plans seem to have more wiggle room than cancer policies. Some will pay for a heart attack but only if there is damage to the heart muscle. Others will pay a reduced benefit for TIA vs. full benefit for stroke.

I have a 61 year old client who still won't talk to me because his Dearborn National (then Colorado Bankers Life) policy only paid 10% of his Heart Attack benefit. The doctor said no damage was done to his heart muscle during his 2008 heart attack. I had no idea. Now, I retrieve and read the "fine print" within all policy certificates before selling a particular product.

 

[rousemark]

I ran across this book a few days ago. Quite interesting, especially the charts towards the back.

Great resource. That is one thing I like about WN. They publish all sorts of quality booklets and white papers throught their foundation that are made available free to the agents.

 

[somarco]

The cancer site (should be) unbiased and perhaps appear more credible. Nothing to sell. No underlying agenda