Can I buy a life insurance on my ex-wife?

Message Author
ampm-bookmark
delicious-small Add to delicious
yahoomyweb-small Add to YahooMyWeb
blinklist-small Add to BlinkList
PostPosted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:54 am   Post subject: Life insurance  

Quote:
There must be an insurable interest between the owner and the insured.
"Insurable interest?"....do you mean the 'relationship' between you nad the person you want to insure?! For example: child, wife, relative, etc.? Or....am I 'way off base' with this?
sdchargersfan
Senior member
Leave a quick message

sdchargersfan

Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 2052


5.14 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:30 am   Post subject:   

You are not off base. It's just that "Insurable Interest" is more of a financial relationship than a relationship.



One always has an insurable interest in their own life. Usually, non-corporate policies are written with the owner and the insured being the same person so insurable interest isn't an issue.



I can't buy insurance on you because your death would have no financial impact on me. If we were business partners, I could. If I was going to raise your son if you died, I could buy a policy on you.

InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:26 pm   Post subject:   

I'm afraid this whole thread is so ludicrous it's impossible to read with a straight face. I guess its time to find out which carriers are issuing life insurance policies without informing the insured. Does anyone want to make any bets on whether brad@brookfield partners will tell me who he's submitting these cases to?



Yes, life insurance polices are issued all the time without the insured's knowledge. THIS IS ILLEGAL and agents have had their licenses permanently revoked for doing so.



In the United States, many of the constraints regarding Insurable Interest were relaxed (if not done away with completely) in around 1994. This happened because members of the Gay community fought to name their partners as beneficiaries and the insurance companies were "legally inclined" to allow it. Afterwhich, most of the insurable interest requirements were lifted. Granted, there are still areas, insuring minors, estate planning, gifting, etc., in which an element of insurable interest must exist but, I'm afraid this is mostly on a case-by-case basis.



I'll send Brad a message and see what happens.



Mark



_________________

Please feel free to go to my website at www.markcolbert.com or, if you have a specific question, you can email me directly. I hope I can answer any questions you might have. If not, I can certainly find an answer right away.
InsInvestigator
Community Consultant
Leave a quick message

InsInvestigator

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 624

Location: Central California
69.88 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:52 pm   Post subject:   

Re: Posts made to ampminsure.com on





---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Posted: 06 Aug 2009 11:58



"I have a carrier that will insure someone without their knowledge. It is more expensive, but it is possible.



If you are interested feel free to e-mail me at brad @ brookfieldpartners.com



PS. for those agents that thought it wasn't possible...I own a brokerage firm, and have worked with agents to insure this risk.





---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------



Posted: 06 Aug 2009 16:46



Of course it's legal. The insurer requires an agreement in place for divorce. From that, it shows a form of insurable interest.



Also, no medical exam is needed to complete.



It is most similar to a one year term policy, except that the policy is underwritten annually. But it is doable, it is just more expensive over the long run.



Most agents think this is not right because your average carrier doesn't insure this risk, and that's what you learn when you start in the business.....doesn't mean it's not possible.



If you know someone that may be a fit, let me know. I own a brokerage general agency, and we work with insurance agents. We work a lot with specialized risks, and this is one of them. In my opinion it is better off getting a fully underwritten contract, but it is not neccessary. Some cases you can't, and this may be one of them.





Hello Brad,



Please forward the name of the insurance carrier(s) you were referring to in the above posts. I would like to ask them a few questions regarding their life insurance policy issue requirements.



I look forward to your reply.



Mark J Colbert

Life Insurance Faud Investigations

www.markcolbert.com



_________________

Please feel free to go to my website at www.markcolbert.com or, if you have a specific question, you can email me directly. I hope I can answer any questions you might have. If not, I can certainly find an answer right away.
InsInvestigator
Community Consultant
Leave a quick message

InsInvestigator

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 624

Location: Central California
69.88 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:14 pm   Post subject:   

InsuranceInvestigator, I don't have the expertise necessary to know if your quote is correct.



Quote:
Yes, life insurance polices are issued all the time without the insured's knowledge. THIS IS ILLEGAL






This certainly seems to me like something that would be handled on a state to state basis. We obviously have the exception for kiddie policies.

However, based upon the link below, and assuming no changes in the law since 2004, it appears to be legal in the state of NY, but only if the insured is the spouse of the owner.



http://www.ins.state.ny.us/ogco2004/rg040319.htm



Assuming that is the case in NY, I would be very surprised if at least one state doesn't allow it even if the people aren't married provided that there is insurable interest.





I look forward to your feedback.
InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:16 pm   Post subject:   

By the way, regardless of whether it is allowed, it seems awfully stupid unless their is a plan for the insured to die pretty quickly. The policy would have to be extremely expensive since there is no way to properly underwrite it.



Personally, I can't name a single carrier that will write a policy without the insured signing. This doesn't mean that they don't exist. I simply don't know.

InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:20 pm   Post subject:   

I have no issue telling you how it is done.



Lloyd's of London is the insurance carrier.



For those that are interested you can check out Petersen's International, they are the coverholder in Valencia, CA.



(Promotional link removed as per TOU)



Click on "Life Programs"



I am no way saying this is the best way or the least expensive way to do it, but it is a solution.



Mark,



When you are done with your research, please post your results to the group on the legality.



Brad

brookfieldpartners
New member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 06 Aug 2009
Posts: 6


3.56 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:49 pm   Post subject:   

Petersen's should have been my guess. They are the company that I need to use for strange cases. Thanks. I guess that the question is what states allow this.

InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 5:50 pm   Post subject:   

By the way for those reading this, they probably don't allow small policies and unlike other policies, the insurer can cancel the policy.

InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 6:36 pm   Post subject:   

InsuranceExpert,



It is always a pleasure to hear from one of my "homies." Thanks for the feedback.



Let's review:



"She and I have been divorced almost 20 yrs but she seems to be on a crash course with fate. I'd like to have a policy in place where if the unthinkable eventually happens our son can benefit from it. I don't want her to know about it as it may give her an incentive to live."



First of all, they haven't been married in almost 20 years. Therefore, the insurance code you referred

to which governs the insurance activities in the state of New York, or any other state, simply cannot apply in this case. Even so,the intent in this post could be interpreted as almost malicious in nature. Of course, it could be argued that he is merely looking after his son. Therefore any forgery, falsification of documents, intent to deceive, fraud, or plain ol'"Bad Faith" should be defensible. I personally doubt it.



In fact, I will send a copy of this thread to my friends in the Investigations Division of the California State Department of Insurance and see where it goes from there. Who knows, I could be wrong and we should all run out and take life insurance policies out our former spouses.



Kiddie policies; I'm assuming you're referring to those issued by Gerber and others like them, are kind-of a no brainer. How the world could you make a three-year-old the owner of his/her own life insurance policy? Of course the parents should be allowed to take out a policy without the authorization of their infant. "Here Junior, put your tiny little footprint right here on this line."



Again, when the goal, if you will, is to take out insurance on the life of someone not related to you is malicious or fraudulent in nature, it simply cannot be legal in any state.



_________________

Please feel free to go to my website at www.markcolbert.com or, if you have a specific question, you can email me directly. I hope I can answer any questions you might have. If not, I can certainly find an answer right away.
InsInvestigator
Community Consultant
Leave a quick message

InsInvestigator

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 624

Location: Central California
69.88 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:00 pm   Post subject:   

There aren't laws being broken here...there is an insurable interest with a former spouse.



Rates are high because of non-med underwriting, and no medical records. Underwriting is done annually, and the coverage is not the cheapest. But again, it is obtainable.



Insurable interest laws are to protect consumer and insurance carriers from having insurance purchased in which there is not an insurable interest.



Lloyd's and Petersen's are following the law with mandating that there be some documented form proving an insurable interest.



For those that disbelieve this possiblty, please forward your apologies after your research....thanks!! LOL



As I see so far, only InsuranceExpert can agree that this is possible.

brookfieldpartners
New member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 06 Aug 2009
Posts: 6


3.56 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:21 pm   Post subject:   

InsInvestigator,



My comments had nothing to do with the original post. I was only responding to this part of your post.



Quote:
Yes, life insurance polices are issued all the time without the insured's knowledge. THIS IS ILLEGAL




With doing some homework on this subject, I believe that we'll find out that this is legal in some states and illegal in others. We should be in agreement that it's legal in NY if the people are spouses (unless the law has changed).



It seems like a very safe assumption that in some states it must be legal or else Peterson's wouldn't be offering this policy.



None of my comments have anything to do with the original question or anything fraudulent. I'm simply asking the question, "In at least one state, are there circumstances in which it is legal to take out insurance without knowlege of an adult insured?" I'm pretty sure that the answer is "yes".
InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:22 pm   Post subject:   

P.S. It's nice to be in a coversation with people who won't have a problem admitting that they are wrong when/if that is the case.

InsuranceExpert
Senior member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 662


142.74 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:26 pm   Post subject:   

RTFP



Before issuing an apology, let me clarify:



Quote:
There aren't laws being broken here...there is an insurable interest with a former spouse.




They've been divorced almost 20 years, where's the insurable interest? If one exists because they share responsibility for a minor child, which is doubtful because they've been apart so long, the parent with custody will petition the court for the right to carry life insurance on the other parent - and a court will usually allow this.



The child, however, is probably more than 20 years old, and providing he/she isn't mentally or developmentally challenged, shouldn't require the income of both parents to survive..... legally speaking.



Therefore, we're back to one parent's goal to ascertain insurance on the life of another (whom he expects to die in a short time) without her knowledge or approval. This is a textbook example of malicious intent.



I have sent a message to Peterson's (giving them your name on the post) and await their response.



If I'm wrong, I'll apologize.


_________________

Please feel free to go to my website at www.markcolbert.com or, if you have a specific question, you can email me directly. I hope I can answer any questions you might have. If not, I can certainly find an answer right away.
InsInvestigator
Community Consultant
Leave a quick message

InsInvestigator

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 624

Location: Central California
69.88 Dollars($)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:31 pm   Post subject:   

That's fine...no hard feelings...I was just kidding...I know people get on rants in raves in the forums of what is acceptable and not acceptable.



In regards to state statutes, I haven't run into any states where this is illegal, but there may be a couple. If something isn't legal in a state I am sure Lloyd's would let you know that it isn't approved in that respective state. They are a major insurer, and I am sure they don't want to lose anything.



I want people to make sure they research something before that start blasting it's legality, and to know that just because there company says one thing doesn't mean that it is the"be all end of all" of everything.



Brad

brookfieldpartners
New member
Leave a quick message



Joined: 06 Aug 2009
Posts: 6


3.56 Dollars($)

Quick Reply
Your Name
Subject
Message body
All times are GMT
 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Page 2 of 4


Get a Quote
Ask Community Experts

flash plugin

Quick Links

Must See

Community

Hot topics in forums

Latest in blogs

AmPmInsure on Facebook



Page loaded in 0.461 seconds.