What is policyholder's situation at the Maturity Date of a Life policy?

To my mind those policy statements conflict directly with this paragraph in information accompanying the pre-purchase illustration I received:
An illustration is not a contract.
Suggest you call the company
 
To my mind those policy statements conflict directly with this paragraph in information accompanying the pre-purchase illustration I received:
An illustration is not a contract.
Suggest you call the company

Again, thank you for taking the time to respond. I understand that an illustration is not a contract. However Illustrations are what I had to work with.

I did NOT have 4 contracts to look at while making a purchase decision. I had 3 illustrations and a quote and customer brochure. So it kinda becomes important when I get a contract and it does not match up to the illustration terminology provided for decision making purposes. Grounds for returning the policy as far as I am concerned.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that's his concern. Seems to me he's worried about not having coverage at that point and no payout at all from the company.
(caveat, not an agent.)

Yes, that was my starting point and the reason I started the thread, --- because I did not know what I did not know.

I first needed to know if that was what would actually happen. If it wasn't going to be what happened, that seemed to leave me with the options of (assuming I lived beyond the endowment date) ---- the policy paying a death benefit when I did die at some point in the future ---- or the policy paying me back.

The policy paying me back was bad news for two reasons.

1) I wanted to leave $10K to the policy beneficiaries --- without using an attorney, a wiill, or probate -etc. I did not want the money back.

2) If the money came back to me, then there would be income tax due on the gain which is also an undesirable result.

I freely admit that it is not too probable I will live to 100, but it is a lot less probable I will live to 121. Those two issues are important enough to me that I was willing to give up an issued and inforce policy to start over.

With the background I've gotten in the thread here, I was able to see the specific reason the policy is unacceptable to me and have an informed conversation with my agent about it.
 
Agree, but he was saying the CV & Death benefit will be equal at maturity. That may not be true even with WL. clients that had dividend option of “accumulate” which was common for decades, would have those Dividend Accumulations over & above the base policy CV.

All I can speak to is this specific policy. It is non-participating. On the first policy anniversary date following my 100th birthday, the Policy Face and the Cash Value are equal. I think my right to a death benefit also expires at that time. My agent talked to the agent support section at the carrier. The company will initiate the transaction at some point after that date, can't remember what he said about the timing, pay me the cash value, and since it is a MEC I would owe tax on the gain.

Your previous comments about ownership change of a MEC also triggering tax were also a shocker for me on this particular policy because I had not decided for sure who I wanted to ulitimately be the owner of it.
 
What all that says, is that for illustration purposes, they show age 100 as maturity. But there is no point you are forced to take the payout yourself based on that language.

The illustration information does not match the actual policy terms. The actual policy contract does have a maturity date. It is, in fact, based on a 100 year age, not 121 years. The ability to receive a death benefit under the policy expires on the first policy anniversary after I turn 100. The carrier will then pay the cash value to me and I will owe tax on the gain. (phone call with agent a little earlier today after he had a couple of phone calls to carrier) (and you know the carrier from my deleted post in another thread.)
 
Back
Top