Your suggestions for underwritten MedSupps/Plan G
- Thread starter yorkriver1
- Start date
Many of us have found that what works in one state may not work in another.
Cigna is a dumpster fire in Georgia. They have rotated 3 or may 4 "Cigna" carriers here over the last half dozen years. One of the ones they introduced maybe 5 years ago (if not longer) would issue a policy on almost anyone who could fog a mirror. Rates were out of sight.
They currently have Cigna National and CSG shows 23 carriers with lower rates (T65 male G plan) and if you don't like that you can look at Cigna National Standard II that has 42 carriers with lower rates.
Lumico was here, then left, then came back as Elips and CSG says there are 22 carriers with lower rates plus they have only been here a little over a year.
Ace has only been in the Medicare market a month. They are competitive if someone wants to roll the dice and see if they live to see a 3 year anniversary. My money says "not likely".
I know some agents and policyholders like to chase the low rate NKOTB but that doesn't work well for me.
Parent carrier ratings mean nothing since they are not the issuing carrier and if the subsidiary get's in trouble they will shut it down or sell it off to another carrier. One thing they won't do is shore up losses. Instead, they will cut and run.
Hello Somarco,
Yes, generally aware of all that you state. Cigna National has been in our area several years now and holding steady. ACE/Chubb part of INA....oldest insurer still operating in the US and who I once worked for. The Lumico rating mentioned is for that company, only and not relying on parent rating.
I'm more aggressive now in looking at newer/lower cost plans in my home state of Maryland where the "Birthday Rule" just became effective. It lets current Med Supp insureds shop within 30-days of their DOB for new coverage under "Guaranteed Issue" consideration, not underwritten. You may use this to move sideways to the same letter plan or to downgrade to a lesser plan. But you can't use it to "trade up" in plans. The new policy may be with your same carrier or switch to any other in your state. Key is you must currently have a Med Supp plan inforce; MAPD members CANNOT use the new rule to get a Med Supp plan.
The good news is the consumer is no longer "locked in" to their current Med Supp if they can't pass underwriting. The bad news is you're going to lose revenue as DOB cases pay minimal GI comp rates for nearly all carriers.
So if one of those companies you don't trust for the long haul starts gaming the system, you're just a DOB away from switching them out to another carrier.
I just contracted and quoting Allstate, ACE and now Lumico. The shoppers are gonna see it or hear about them from the competition so I prefer my people hear it from me first.
Yes, generally aware of all that you state. Cigna National has been in our area several years now and holding steady. ACE/Chubb part of INA....oldest insurer still operating in the US and who I once worked for. The Lumico rating mentioned is for that company, only and not relying on parent rating.
I'm more aggressive now in looking at newer/lower cost plans in my home state of Maryland where the "Birthday Rule" just became effective. It lets current Med Supp insureds shop within 30-days of their DOB for new coverage under "Guaranteed Issue" consideration, not underwritten. You may use this to move sideways to the same letter plan or to downgrade to a lesser plan. But you can't use it to "trade up" in plans. The new policy may be with your same carrier or switch to any other in your state. Key is you must currently have a Med Supp plan inforce; MAPD members CANNOT use the new rule to get a Med Supp plan.
The good news is the consumer is no longer "locked in" to their current Med Supp if they can't pass underwriting. The bad news is you're going to lose revenue as DOB cases pay minimal GI comp rates for nearly all carriers.
So if one of those companies you don't trust for the long haul starts gaming the system, you're just a DOB away from switching them out to another carrier.
I just contracted and quoting Allstate, ACE and now Lumico. The shoppers are gonna see it or hear about them from the competition so I prefer my people hear it from me first.
My attitude would probably be different if GA was a birthday or anniversary state . . . but it isn't so I have to be more "protective" of my client base. And I know how birthday and anniversary rules work. No need to "school" me on the merits of these situations.
I also know the Medigap GI situations and will use them sparingly since there is only one carrier that pays full comp on GI.
There will always be someone with a lower rate but that is meaningless if that is the only thing the carrier, and the agent, have to offer is price.
I never have sold on price and almost never lose prospects or clients to a lower rate.
Regardless, I am not dealing with the parent carrier, only the issuing carrier.
GM produced some nice cars at one time but none of them had the GM brand (trucks are the exception). I owned a few Pontiacs and liked them, but I did not buy because of the GM brand. Same for a Saturn I owned, and the Old's Starfire (circa 1976).
Back to insurance . . . I also don't put any credence in who is reinsuring the block or who is the TPA. Reinsurance carriers and TPA's are transparent and can jump off a risk with impunity. Neither makes an impact on the stability or continuity of the block. All that really matters is the name on the policy and how committed they are to the long term.
I also know the Medigap GI situations and will use them sparingly since there is only one carrier that pays full comp on GI.
There will always be someone with a lower rate but that is meaningless if that is the only thing the carrier, and the agent, have to offer is price.
I never have sold on price and almost never lose prospects or clients to a lower rate.
Regardless, I am not dealing with the parent carrier, only the issuing carrier.
GM produced some nice cars at one time but none of them had the GM brand (trucks are the exception). I owned a few Pontiacs and liked them, but I did not buy because of the GM brand. Same for a Saturn I owned, and the Old's Starfire (circa 1976).
Back to insurance . . . I also don't put any credence in who is reinsuring the block or who is the TPA. Reinsurance carriers and TPA's are transparent and can jump off a risk with impunity. Neither makes an impact on the stability or continuity of the block. All that really matters is the name on the policy and how committed they are to the long term.
Similar threads
