- 322
So I'm working a Jane lead today and the nice little old lady tells me shes in process of cancelling a Bankers policy 3 mo old cause he agent left and she just likes having an agent ( nice but don't know how much that's worth on a 2500 policy). So I write her a modified since she had breast cancer 15 months ago.
I ask for the Bankers policy to do the replacement---I know many prob would'nt have on a $20/mo policy---and find she had more insurance than she thought she had ( 2500, same as what I quoted $28 for)------to no surprise the Bankers guy answered NO to cancer over last 3 years to give her a level rate 30% less than my legitimate written rate
She didn't stop me but integrity and conscience beckons me to call her and tell her maybe she should keep what she has. We know that lied on app wont pay during contestability period either but shes paying $8 / mo more. Most definitely the agent lied and not her / she was taken back when I showed her the NO answer. Shes really in a better place keeping the better/lower price policy albeit by lies, right?
Any input---------am I doing the right thing deciding to not want to take this replacement??????
Bankers agents are captive, right?????----not a carrier independants have. Is it the general rule of thumb there to NO all the way down routinely without regard to the facts or is it just by some and many rogue agents???? If its the former and its encouraged, why do they even have an application???? and if its not encouraged why do they allow it with such regularity?????? Are they just betting on the insured getting beyond contestibilty to sell policies they might not write truthfully. If this woman died of a reoccurrence of cancer after contestability I assume it would be paid with no regard the cancer questions was obviously intentionally answered untruthfully ( would never be know if the insured or agent answered it wrong). Is a lying agent home free after contestability period is over???
Should I try to avoid the replacement and suggest she just keep the better and lower price plan albeit via the agent lie????
I ask for the Bankers policy to do the replacement---I know many prob would'nt have on a $20/mo policy---and find she had more insurance than she thought she had ( 2500, same as what I quoted $28 for)------to no surprise the Bankers guy answered NO to cancer over last 3 years to give her a level rate 30% less than my legitimate written rate
She didn't stop me but integrity and conscience beckons me to call her and tell her maybe she should keep what she has. We know that lied on app wont pay during contestability period either but shes paying $8 / mo more. Most definitely the agent lied and not her / she was taken back when I showed her the NO answer. Shes really in a better place keeping the better/lower price policy albeit by lies, right?
Any input---------am I doing the right thing deciding to not want to take this replacement??????
Bankers agents are captive, right?????----not a carrier independants have. Is it the general rule of thumb there to NO all the way down routinely without regard to the facts or is it just by some and many rogue agents???? If its the former and its encouraged, why do they even have an application???? and if its not encouraged why do they allow it with such regularity?????? Are they just betting on the insured getting beyond contestibilty to sell policies they might not write truthfully. If this woman died of a reoccurrence of cancer after contestability I assume it would be paid with no regard the cancer questions was obviously intentionally answered untruthfully ( would never be know if the insured or agent answered it wrong). Is a lying agent home free after contestability period is over???
Should I try to avoid the replacement and suggest she just keep the better and lower price plan albeit via the agent lie????
Last edited: