According to a recent Times report, the amount of money life insurance companies withheld from beneficiaries more than doubled over the last ten years. The Times analysed data compiled by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, for this conclusion. Last year alone more than 5,000 life policy holders were denied their claims – and the main reason cited was ‘flawed applications’.

Life insurance companies do pay the majority of claims, and paid out $38 billion pounds on individual life policy death benefits last year, but a recent case involving American General has shown that Life Insurers are not always playing fair when it comes to refusing to pay out.

American Life Cancelled Life Policy and Withheld Monies from ‘Exemplary’ Life Policy Holders

Sheila Weissberger became a widow in 2005, after her husband Ian died of Lou Gehrig’s disease. American Life was the Weissbergers’ life insurer and – according to their advertizing -the protector of ‘the hopes and dreams of American families’. Upon the death of Mr Weissberger, they cancelled Mr Weissburger’s life policy and much to her astonishment refused to pay Mrs Weissberger the expected $250,000 payout.

American life confirmed the premiums were fully paid up, no fraud was suspected and nobody could doubt that Sheila Weissberger was the rightful sole beneficiary – plus, Mr Weissberger’s illness was not diagnosed for several months after taking out the life policy. In fact it might seem as if the Weissbergers were exemplary life policy holders.

Refused Payout to Widow on basis Life Application was ‘Incomplete’

The reason for this decision was, according to American Life, that the life policy application was in their opinion incomplete. They stated that Mr Weissberger had failed to declare on the form that he had a bipolar disorder and pulmonary disease – conditions he did not actually have, according to his doctors.

Due to their decision Mrs Weissberger, 62, said “I lost my house. I lost everything” “It was very, very devastating”. American General has now reached a confidential financial settlement with Mrs Weissberger, but she will not likely to ever forget this period in her life.

Most Common Reason for Withholding Payouts is ‘Flawed Applications’

Life insurers can refuse to payout on policies for legitimate reasons such as foul play, unpaid premiums and suicide, but the most common reason for disputing claims is ‘material misrepresentation’. This means failure to disclose information deemed important when assessing risk – this clause can allow life insurance companies to totally rescind live cover.

The majority of American states have banned limitless rescissions in order to stop life insurers abusing the system, but Californian and other areas, life insurance companies can rescind life policies in the two years following the signing of a policy.

Source: Latimes.com November 2010

photo credit: StuartWebster, tibchris

People getting divorced are often locked in a hostile battle: The emphasis is on whom gets what in terms of property, income and assets, and of course who gets custody of the children if there are any. But what happens if, during divorce proceedings, one of the spouses becomes critically ill or dies – with no changes to life insurance during the divorce?

This was illustrated recently in a high profile celebrity divorce case where the life policy owner – film star Dennis Hopper, was locked in an acrimonious divorce with his estranged fifth wife Victoria Duffy-Hopper. Hopper attempted to change the beneficiary of his life policy mid divorce so that his wife and young daughter would not receive an insurance payout in the event of his death. However the judge decided he would have to wait until the divorce came to trial before any names could be changed. Hopper died before the divorce came through and his estranged partner received the life insurance payout.

Rules Prevent Life Policy Holders from Impulsiveness

The rules regarding when changes can be made to an estate plan vary from state to state. In California, for instance, no changes can be made for a set period of time after a divorce is filed. What this seems to imply is that a person holding a life insurance policy might be better off making any necessary changes before filing the divorce papers.

The reasons for preventing those going through a divorce from making big changes such as changing beneficiaries of wills or life insurance policies is to allow them a ‘cooling off’ period; it has happened that soon to be divorced couples reunite and, if a spouse then dies without having changed their will or life policy back, they leave their bereaved partner with nothing.

Source

The Probate Lawyer Blog[1], June 2010; also featured in Forbes Magazine [2]

photo credit: ljv

A mortuary worker from Los Angeles, California contrived a morbid scheme – that of faking her own death in order to defraud life insurance companies. She even went as far as to stage her own funeral, which included the cremation of a mannequin and cow parts which had been placed in the coffin.

Jean Crump, aged 67, from Los Angeles, could face a prison sentence of up to 90 years after a jury found her guilty of fraud, including one count of mail fraud and two counts of wire fraud.

Woman Sought a $1.2 million Life Insurance Benefit

Crump, along with three accomplices went to painstaking lengths in her attempt to defraud a life insurance company and obtain payment on a policy worth more than 1.2 million dollars.

1. First the woman obtained a fake death certificate
2. Then, Crump purchased land for a burial plot
3. Finally, she staged a funeral where an empty casket was buried

Foul play Suspected by Life Insurers

The life insurance company became suspicious of the claims and launched an investigation, so Crump took drastic measures. She had the coffin exhumed and filled with animal remains and a dummy before cremating the contents.

Fraud Included Obtaining Advance Funding for Bereaved Families

Crump has also been charged with obtaining money from a life insurance company to cover bereavement expenses, in order to cover the cost of the funeral (the life insurance company later takes a cut of the life insurance payout of the deceased life insurance policy holder). Crump is to be sentenced later this year – her accomplices have pleaded guilty as charged.

Source

Daily Telegraph

photo credit: codepo8

According to a recent survey by the Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, based in New York, people aged 40 and under are opting for traditional whole life coverage rather than alternative forms of life coverage, in a bid to ensure their financial stability in the shorter term. The research showed that younger buyers are keen to pay off their policies within ten years or less, with 35% stating that they would rather meet financial obligations now than have to pay for it over their lifetime.

Limited Pay Policies Up By 152%

As Michael Ferik, Senior VP for independent life cover at Guardian Life, speaking at Guardian Whole Life International Forum on October 5 stated “This finding underscores a pronounced desire among Millenials and Gen Xers for financial security at an early age.” This research seems to be corroborated by the fact that sales of ‘limited pay’ life policies at Guardian life – policies which can be paid off over a shorter term, were up by a massive 152% year on year to June this year.

Young Life Policy Buyers Plan their Financial Futures

According to the Guardian survey, 74% of those aged 40 and under stated that they wanted to be more financially stable sooner rather than later, with 76% or respondents saying it was very important for them to be debt free in the near future. In contrast, those aged 40 or older attached less importance to having financial stability or leaving debts behind at 69% and 68% respectively. Mr Ferik believes this could be down to the heavy burden of student debt which younger people have had to deal with which has been reflected in a “desire to be debt free” rather than the more typical baby boomers who have more of a “live for today” attitude.

Protecting Families Number One Reason for Buying Life Insurance

The main reason given by the under 40′s for purchasing life insurance was to protect their families (72%) Those aged over 40 also gave this reason with 79% giving it as the driving motivation. Both age groups also counted the cash payout as the second biggest reason for taking out life coverage.

The results seem to indicate that younger buyers see whole life insurance as less of an ‘insurance product’ but rather as one of a number of assets which can be used to build a stable financial future. According to Ferik “They see whole life’s benefits for meeting unanticipated financial needs that arrive while still alive as better than borrowing from a 401K plan or – for now at least – betting on the stock market.”

Source: Insurancenewsnet.com

photo credit: faungg

There has been a recent clampdown in places such as Oklahoma on the unscrupulous practices of buyers and intermediaries of life policies sold by seniors; there have been numerous instances where $1million policies have sold for as little as $35,000.

Despite this there is, according to Kim Holland, the insurance commissioner of Oklahoma “a legitimate purpose in viaticals and life settlements.”  The sale of a policy whereby the seller is not expected to live more than two years is known as a Viatical and these payments are not subject to income taxes. Life settlements on the other hand are made on policies surrendered where the owner has a longer life expectancy, and are subject to taxation.

Jonathan Pond, a financial advisor from Newton, Massachusetts agrees that cashing in a life insurance policy sometimes makes sense and states “If you really need the cash then it’s certainly worthwhile to consider”.

Substantial number of Seniors Seek to Cash in Life Policies

The trade in selling viatical policies emerged in the 80’s as individuals with AIDs, for whom death suddenly loomed large cashed in their policies to get quick access to finance either because they had lost their jobs or had to pay huge medical bills. Since then another group of people have taken their place – people approaching their seventies who wish to surrender or sell their life insurance policies for reasons such as needing money for long term health care, for vacations or just cash to make ends meet. Alternatively, some older people find that they have amply provided for themselves and their spouse via other investments and have no need of the policy any longer.

Seek Financial Advice before Cashing in a Life Policy

Although Jonathan Pond believes that cashing in a life policy can be a valid way of raising money he urges his clients to try other routes first. Typical life policies will reserve some of their value as a death benefit even after it has been surrendered. And the policy owner may be disappointed with the amount after tax is applied. The amount they get depends on a number of factors, including their age, sex, health, and life expectancy, the type of policy it is, and the cash value of the policy.

Those selling Life Insurance Policies should shop around

Gloria Grening Volk has written a book entitled “Cash for the Final Days” (Bialkin Books 1997) and she says selling a policy should be looked upon in the same way as selling a house – “Don’t go with the first one that makes you an offer.” Matthew J Gaul, deputy superintendant for life insurance at the New York State Insurance Department agrees that sales were “something where consumers really need to price comparison shop among different providers.”

Source: Charles Delafuente “When Life Insurance is More Valuable as Cash”, NY Times Mar 3 2010

photo credit: Hakan Dahlstrom