by marc » Mon Feb 02, 2009 02:05 pm
Hello, my father is died and he had some annuities where the benificiary is his wife. But in his last testament, he gives these annuities to his children(giving all identification numbers in his testament). What to do with this?
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 02:57 am Post Subject:
Before you get too excited and go out to hire an attorney, you should write a strongly worded letter in your own words to Mr. Alan J. Kreczko, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, at
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.
Office of General Counsel
One Hartford Plaza
Hartford, CT 06155
to the effect that you have satisfied all of The Hartford's requirements to prove your claim to your 50% share of the annuity proceeds (be sure to include the policy number), and that The Hartford is demonstrating BAD FAITH by holding your proceeds hostage to another beneficiary who refuses to claim his share.
Be very adamant, and tell them that if they want to send your brother's share to the state's unclaimed property office, you could care less, but if they attempt to do that with your share that you will seek specific, general, and punitive damages through civil litigation.
Start keeping track of the things you might have purchased with the money, or bills you might have paid off, and the cost of the items or the interest you are subsequently paying. Those would be specific damages. Your sleepless nights, wondering how you're going to pay your bills, or purchase that vehicle you need to get to work, or the medical treatment you need . . . those are all types of general damages (the "pain and suffering" stuff).
The punitive damages are what judges and juries have discretion to award over and above the specific and general damages to "spank" a person (such as an insurance company) for their bad behavior in hopes that they will not do the same thing in the future to you or someone else. Punitive damages can double or triple the other money you are awarded, and your lawyer will be happy to collect his 30%-40% share of the entire amount.
Keep us posted on how things are going.
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 03:14 pm Post Subject: Annuity
Here is an update to my post from yesterday. My agent called me this morning, Hartford is going to pass this on to the courts to decide, interpleader is the term he used. Here is some addiotonal information I have; my brother has a form that my mother signed in 2009 making him the full beneficiary, that form was sent to Hartford and they reviewed it and denied his contesting that he should be the only beneficiary. Hartford denied the claim because the paper work my brother sent in was on a MONY form! In 2009 the agent sent the original form that my mother had signed to change beneficiaries back to her and asked her if she wanted to redo the paperwork, she said "NO" I don't want to do anything at this time and put it in her lockbox. My brother is going to present to the court that it was my mothers intent that he was to receive all the money.
I talked with the agent this morning and he will testify in court that my mother told him that she changed her mind (in 2009) and that she wanted the forms mailed back to her, including the original. My brother is still determined to claim all of the money. So it's off to court we go!!
Any advise you can provide me would be greatly appreciated.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 09:22 am Post Subject:
It's a good thing that you have the testimony of the agent available. If a court case has been filed (or this is in process in the probate court already) if you have not already done so, you might want to get a probate/estate attorney involved and conduct a deposition of the agent "just in case" (even if something tragic were to occur, a deposition is legally admissible as evidence).
My brother is going to present to the court that it was my mothers intent that he was to receive all the money.
Utterly meaningless (as long as the judge understands insurance law). Unless a beneficiary change statement is properly filed with the insurance company PRIOR to the death of the insured, it is not possible to submit one after the insured's death -- even if it is dated prior to that date of death (always room for forgery or alteration of a date there). To be effective, it would have to have been mailed and postmarked the day prior to your mother's death.
The court should properly rule that the proceeds are divisible 50-50, and if your brother still won't sign the appropriate claim form, you will get your share regardless. The "interpleader" is the Insurance Company's way of "washing its hands" of the whole mess. They give the entire death benefit to the court, ending their responsibility to any and all beneficiaries, and leave it up to the court to sort out the distribution.
It might cost you $1000-$2000 to hire an attorney to defend your position. Because of the nature of the dispute, if your lawyer asks for his fees and expenses as part of the distribution, it could be deducted from your brother's share of the proceeds and passed to you. That, too, is a matter for the court, not the insurance company.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 01:36 pm Post Subject: Annuity
Thank you so much for your timely responses. I have engaged an attorney and after discussions with him feel confident I will receive my share of the proceeds. His response was very similar to yours.
Again, thank you and I will post the outcome of the interpleading. I'm nervous but confident.
G
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 04:19 pm Post Subject: Annuity
Here is an update to my previous post's on my Hartford annuity. As you know I was named a beneficiary by my mother along with my brother on her Hartford Annuity. My brother continues to refuse to send in his signed forms to Hartford so Hartford will not pay me my share of the annuity (50%). My brother continues to state that her should receive all the money, it was my mothers wish.
At your (and my attorney's) suggestion I sent a registered letter to Alan J. Kreczko, Executive Vice President and General Counsel at Hartford, I have received no response. I continue phone conversations with Hartford requesting what action thay are going to take. Last week I was told that they were considering the interpleader action. I asked the Hartford manager how that process was initiated and he told me I had to start that process!!! I know from talkiing with my attorney that is incorrect. Just an example of the run around I get from Hartford.
I am frustrated.............. any suggestions? I would like to avoid going to court but I can't even get that initiated!
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 08:05 pm Post Subject:
If you have an attorney, you should let him handle this by writing the appropriate "lawyer letter" that is supposed to get someone's attention.
I assume that a probate case has been opened, and would allow The Hartford to file its interpleader and deposit the money for the court to distribute. In the meantime, every day of delay is another bit of interest added to the account.
Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:28 am Post Subject: Annuity
Here is another update; Hartford's attorney called me today and told me Hartford is going the interpleader route. He stated i will receive a letter in the mail in 7-10 days stating the other beneficiaries position (my brother) and stating my position. I asked the attorney "what is my position"? He said he didn't know because he has not reviewed the case yet.
As I stated to the Hartford attorney I can't believe this is going to court. The agent has sent a letter to Hartford stating my mother was of sound mind when she signed the beneficiary change form in Febuary of 2009. He also stated that he gave her the wrong beneficiary change form (MONY form) and called her the next day telling her that. He said he would send her the correct form. My mother said " send ALL the forms back to me, i want to think about it. My mother then put them in her lock box and my brother found them (two copies and the original) after her death in February 2011. My brother has an attorney and apparently there is enough to cause Hartford to had it over to the courts.
I am meeting with my attorney next week, I feel like a victim, worse yet I feel like I have done something wrong.
From what I have read about beneficiary changes after some one is dead it seems like my brother does not have much of a case here. I am surprised he found an attorney to take his case.
Am I missing something here? Will those forms filled out in 2009 and found im my mothers lockbox after her death carry any weight in a court of law?
Again, thank you for your timely and informative responses.
G
Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 03:55 am Post Subject:
He stated i will receive a letter in the mail in 7-10 days stating the other beneficiaries position (my brother) and stating my position. I asked the attorney "what is my position"?
Your position is whatever you communicated in your letter to The Hartford. Probably that you believe you are entitled to 50% of the policy proceeds and that your brother is entitled to the other half.
The interpleader is nothing special. It is the procedure the insurance company takes to end its responsibilities to the contract and beneficiaries. By turning over the money to the court, the insurance company fulfills its promise to your mother to pay the proceeds after her death.
Then it becomes an issue for the court to determine what should be done with the money. There's no guarantee that you will prevail in your quest for 50% of the proceeds, but hundreds of years of insurance practice and law are on your side. Insurance contracts clearly state that a revocable beneficiary will be changed/added/deleted upon submission of request in the form required by the insurance company DURING the lifetime of the policyowner and/or insured/annuitant. Unless the form was in transit at the time of death, it is generally impossible to invoke a change of beneficiary later.
Probate courts have a responsibility to dispose of a person's estate in the most equitable manner under the law. It must first satisfy direct claims against the decedent's estate: employees' wages, federal tax liabilities, state and local tax liabilities, claims of general creditors of the estate, named beneficiaries of a will, any other person with a claim against estate assets. If there is no will, then things become a bit more complex, as the probate court may want to look to others in the family tree beyond children (although it should not in your case). When there are no children, then the court starts looking for aunts and uncles (those related by blood not marriage), cousins, and so on down the line.
In an interpleader, the insurance money is exempt from the claims above. It is earmarked and protected from the claims of estate and/or beneficiary creditors. It is merely being held by the court until the disposition of that asset is determined. It will not become an asset of the estate. The court will either (1) divide the money 50-50 between you and your brother or (2) divide the money in some other ratio, or (3) give 100% of the money to you or your brother, without recourse by the party who received 0%. The most likely outcome is (1). If your brother doesn't like that, he can disclaim his share, and his portion will go to you.
You just want to know that your attorney is knowledgeable in insurance law as well as probate law. This is not an area for "generalists" or someone with little understanding or experience.
You might want to look up one of our forum members, Mark Colbert (aka InsInvestigator) and send him a "PM" regarding your situation. He may have more to add or advice to offer.
Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:27 pm Post Subject:
Max, wrong again.
As long as the insured is the owner of the policy, it is an asset of the estate.
Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2011 06:07 pm Post Subject:
You're wrong. This is an annuity and there is a named beneficiary (actually two beneficiaries), so it is not the property of the estate -- the proceeds are due to one or both beneficiaries.
There is a dispute between the beneficiaries as to the distribution amounts of the proceeds. The insurance company takes no sides and turns this matter and the money over to the court for disposition via the interpleader, ending its responsibilities to the contract. Because the beneficiaries cannot resolve this amicably, there are now attorneys involved, and they will (effectively) get a cut of the proceeds that only the beneficiaries should be entitled to.
If there was no named beneficiary, the situation would be very different. But that is not the case according to the original post.
Add your comment