Insurance Agent Forum

[senior-advisor-indiana]

Mike Golden I eas not trying to insult you. I wasn't giving any advise. I am just here. I don't think there is anything wrong with what you are doing and I don't see how anyone else would. I think they are just messin with you. I am not.

Originally Posted by K-Dub

And Assurant doesn't?? Just about every carrier has some type of stripped out plan!

What I said was that for someone to criticize the sale of a policy with limited or no prescription drug coverage when his favorite carrier probably generates 50% or more of their sales from plans that totally exclude Prescription drug coverage or have a policy of ridering such coverage when the applicant is taking prescription drugs is disingenuous.

If the point is that an agent opens up potential liability by offering such a plan but has no such potential liability if it is ridered my attitude is 'So What?'

My goals are to get clients the best possible coverage for their specific needs and budget, not just sell plans that maximize the premium no matter what the coverage (or lack of coverage) with no potential legal liability. If some of you don't share those goals it's fine, it's a big world out there.

I started thread to let others, who might have some interest, about the Esolutions plan, which I think has is a really good fit for people with limited budgets and no existing coverage. I think it has a place in a health insurance portfolio just like 50 other plans many of us offer. If anyone doesn't want to offer it, then don't, just like I rarely offer Golden Rule because I don't want clients getting 5 rate increases in the next 3 years; I'm more interested in happy, long term clients in the same health plan than switching them out every year and not worrying about the implications of having a client with changing health being forced to give up insurance because they can no longer afford the premium. If you are talking about potential legal liability maybe some of you should look there before commenting on anyone else's situation.

[healthagent]

We are fighting hard to get away from personal attacks here and so far have been doing a good job.

Especially in the past few weeks this board has been very enjoyable and everyone's been getting along. Let's not ruin it.

[johnrocks]

Originally Posted by john_petrowski

We are fighting hard to get away from personal attacks here and so far have been doing a good job.

Especially in the past few weeks this board has been very enjoyable and everyone's been getting along. Let's not ruin it.

I love you man!!!

[joshril]

I like the product.. Most products have a place if they are sold in the right circumstances. Of course there are exceptions and poor products out there, but sold correctly, this is a great product. If a client understand that they will not have prescription coverage, I don't see an E&O issue as long as the product is sold correctly. Hell, you could have an E&O issue with just about any product out there if it is not sold properly!

[midwestbroker]

From what I have gotten from this:

GTL E - If you cannot get past underwriting, this is the plan for you.

But then again, I do not even bother messing with individual health. And after reading through this post, I think I will stick with my seniors.

Originally Posted by midwestbroker

From what I have gotten from this:

GTL E - If you cannot get past underwriting, this is the plan for you.

But then again, I do not even bother messing with individual health. And after reading through this post, I think I will stick with my seniors.

It won't necessarily get you through underwriting any easier if you are over 50-even though there isn't an MIB check there is a required APS if you are over 55 and an APS if you are 50-54 and don't have existing coverage. And, as with any other policy, any misrepresentations on the application will only come back to bite you if you make a claim.

The guidelines, though, are somewhat more lenient, particularly if you are on meds for either Hypertension and/or Cholesterol and/or have Height/Weight issues.

[somarco]

If you cannot get past underwriting, this is the plan for you

Actually, you have a better chance of getting coverage with a fully underwritten product if you have health issues, are overweight, or both.

A 6' 0" male can weigh 281 with Time and be accepted but declined by GTL.

If you are under age 50, in reasonably good health, are willing to take a $10k SIR with no Rx cover and want your policy approved in 2 days, this might be the plan for you.

Otherwise you are probably better off with something else.

[healthagent]

Well, saying both Assurant and GR pay more commission than GTL I'd assume anyone who put a client with GTL already ruled out Assurant and GR.

[The New Guy]

GTL is which company?

Originally Posted by john_petrowski

Well, saying both Assurant and GR pay more commission than GTL I'd assume anyone who put a client with GTL already ruled out Assurant and GR.

Exactly, I recommended the Esolution yesterday to a 49 year old overweight hypertense guy who's doctor wasn't in the PHCS network-it increased the premium for CoreMed up to almost $400 and he can probably get Esolution for $260-260-he also doesn't care about Rx coverage. My commissions for CoreMed (advanced) would have been double the advance for the GTL product but I wasn't sure it would get through underwriting and I want him covered (he has no coverage and is a heart attack waiting to happen)

[healthagent]

Ooops, overweight with HBP? Well there goes GR and at least a 50% to 75% load for Assurrant. But I'm sure the armchair quarterbacks will chime in.

[somarco]

Ooops, overweight with HBP? Well there goes GR

Not necessarily.

Like many, including you, have pointed out before, each case is different.

6' 0" male at 265 is standard issue with GR with a rider for treatment of hypertension only (not including potential related medical issues).

Same guy with Time/John Alden (Assurant is not an issuing carrier for individual health), up to 50% load for wt plus whatever they want to tack on for the meds. Could even be a decline if the load exceeds 75%.

But what do I know? I am just another armchair guy . . .

[healthagent]

Actually the load can far exceed 75% with Assurant depending on the state. But what do I know. I'm sure Mike's a big boy now and places people where he needs to go. Who knows - I don't write GTL. I personally don't have my clients sign any riders. But that's just me.

[healthagent]

Yeah...my female potential clients never liked that clause. I'd like to tell them they have no liablity for the next 6 months for reproductive disorders but my Magic 8 ball is broken.

[Alsky]

Originally Posted by john_petrowski

Actually the load can far exceed 75% with Assurant depending on the state. But what do I know. I'm sure Mike's a big boy now and places people where he needs to go. Who knows - I don't write GTL. I personally don't have my clients sign any riders. But that's just me.

Even with being new to the health insurance field, this is probably a stupid question... but here goes, any possible company to place the following client.
Male age 61 smoker
Female age 60 smoker
Insured with Mega ,$1,000,000 max, 1000 ded, 80/20/5000, $1225 mo
Diabetes and prozac,Would like a quote...

[somarco]

Aetna is most likely your only possibility. In some cases they will look at a type II diabetic. If type I forget it. The smoker + diabetes may be a deal breaker.

Move on to a better prospect.