by Guest » Mon Jul 27, 2009 07:07 pm
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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 05:20 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
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 05:49 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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 05:50 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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 06:36 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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 07:00 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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 07:21 pm Post Subject:
InsInvestigator,
My comments had nothing to do with the original post. I was only responding to this part of your post.
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".
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 07:22 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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 07:26 pm Post Subject:
RTFP
Before issuing an apology, let me clarify:
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.
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 07:31 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
Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 07:57 pm Post Subject:
InsuranceExpert,
I must agree with you....to a point.
For example; If a woman takes out life insurance on the man she is married to at the time, it is usually considered acceptable, no-harm-no-foul. Keeping the insurance in force after they've divorced, however, is whole 'nuther can of worms.
But, taking out life insurance on the life of a 20-year former spouse without her knowledge because you think something bad is going to happen to her (another term for death) is altogether wrong.
Mark
Add your comment