Unusual number of LTC inquiries

or Register to post new content in the forum

24 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Apr 17, 2008 5:20 pm

I have had 3 unsolicited inquiries about LTC insurance in the last 2 days, and one of those was to run 3 seperate quotes for Mom, son/wife, and daughter/husband.  That's 5 quotes to run.  Granted I probably won't close all of that, but if I could quote a couple of those every day that would certainly be a nice supplement to my income.  

 
Is this just me or are the rest of you being asked about this?  I think part of it is people would rather talk about life/LTC insurance right now than their investments.  Or maybe it is me being more comfortable in that area right now. 
 
Either way, my life/LTC applications are increasing, which is a good thing.
 
Also, any experience with Knights of Columbus and/or Bankers Life LTC insurance?  I know I am being shopped against them, and I don't know their reputation for paying claims.
Apr 17, 2008 5:54 pm

If you live in MO, the Gov sent a letter out to all residents between 50 and 65 (I could be wrong on the ages) saying that they need to get their own LTC policy cause the state won't be able to pay for all the baby boomers hitting nursing  homes.  I paraphrased of course, but you get the picture.  If a letter like that went out in your state, it might have caused a spike in requests. 

 
On a side note, as an alternative to the traditional LTC policies that clients see as expensive and with no guarantees to get anything back, you should look at something like Moneyguard from Lincoln.  My Lincoln guys calls it a live, quit, or die LTC solution.  It's a nice alternative to those clients who need LTCI, have the cash to "self-insure", but don't want to pay the annual premiums cause they might not get anything back out of them.  That and he swears that 75% of the money to pay for the insurance comes from somewhere besides your current assets. 
Apr 17, 2008 7:34 pm

I do not know about the claims-paying ability of KoC.  however, I've heard other reps complain about Bankers Life.  For the record, I have not used either company.  YMMV.

 
I agree with icecold, a lot more people have experience with long term care.  soon, there won't be a family who won't have to deal with it in some way.  For some cases, LTCi is a fine solution.  However, I would strongly suggest not knee-jerking towards LTCinsurance.  For many folks, using a permanent life insurance policy (WL or GUL, depending on age, assets, etc) may be a better fit for the client.  Spaceman Spiff already pointed those out.  Moreover, I would be remiss if I didn't encourage you to look at something besides MoneyGard.  Typically, the individual parts are more competitvely priced than the combo (which moneyguard is).  Ultimately, I would suggest you speak with a Long Term Care planning expert who you can split the case with.   That way, you won't be forced to compete on price.  Because with things like LTCi (like most everything in life) you get what you pay for.  Good luck.
Apr 17, 2008 9:30 pm

EDJ4now,


Here's a quiz for you.  Take the time to find the answers.  You'll thank me. 


QUESTION 1: Name one company that sells LTCi that is Bankers' size or bigger that has worse third party ratings. 
 
QUESTION 2: Talk about Bankers' history of price increases.
 
QUESTION 3: Does the Bankers' Life agent shop for the best product for the client or can he only sell Bankers' regardless of the situation?
 
I can't help you out with Knights of Columbus and their LTCi, but they are a strong company.
 
Spaceman Spiff,  it is very seldom that the the Moneyguard product will be in the best interest of the client.   It would take a very specific set of facts.  It's like the old crosstraining shoes.  They were ok for lots of things, but not very good for anything.
 
Miscellaneous:
Never have a client buy LTCi without exploring life insurance (WL and/or GUL).
Since the price is not guaranteed, company strength is critical.   Advisors need to understand which companies are more likely to raise prices on existing clients.
Apr 17, 2008 11:50 pm

I've seen it become much more common place.  Only a couple of years ago, it was thought of as some morbid issue that wasn't fun to talk about.  But because people have become so desensitized about it, the conversations are very open.


For virtually every retirement planning case I work on, LTCi comes up as an important issue.  I am experiencing clients wanting it from the beginning.
Apr 18, 2008 11:17 am

You are correct that a product like Moneyguard isn't appropriate for all circumstances.   I love talking about it with those folks who won't even talk about traditional LTCI because they know they might not get anything out of it.  When you tack on riders like ROP to a typical LTC policy it becomes so expensive that they just decide to take the risk of not needing it.  If they feel they can self insure and they have the cash to do it, Moneyguard is a nice alternative to the CD they have sitting in the bank waiting for the nursing home. 

Apr 18, 2008 2:40 pm

If they feel they can self insure and they have the cash to do it, Moneyguard is a nice alternative to the CD they have sitting in the bank waiting for the nursing home. 

 
I had a case a few months back like this.   We were able to blow Moneyguard out of the water.  For the same premium,  we bought a SPIA.  The SPIA was used to buy a GUL policy that had a greater death benefit than the MoneyGuard product and it purchased a vastly superior LTC policy.  We had the added benefit that using the LTC had no impact on the death benefit. 
 
The last time that I looked into this, Moneyguard really only made sense if the person is older (70's) and only one spouse is getting LTCi.
Jul 19, 2008 9:53 pm
anonymous:

If they feel they can self insure and they have the cash to do it, Moneyguard is a nice alternative to the CD they have sitting in the bank waiting for the nursing home. 

 
I had a case a few months back like this.   We were able to blow Moneyguard out of the water.  For the same premium,  we bought a SPIA.  The SPIA was used to buy a GUL policy that had a greater death benefit than the MoneyGuard product and it purchased a vastly superior LTC policy.  We had the added benefit that using the LTC had no impact on the death benefit. 
 
The last time that I looked into this, Moneyguard really only made sense if the person is older (70's) and only one spouse is getting LTCi.



Anon,

Could you explain this piece "a GUL policy that had a greater death benefit than the MoneyGuard product and it purchased a vastly superior LTC policy"? Specifically how the GUL "purchased" a LTCI policy?

I don't think I've run across this so would like to understand how the different cogs come together.

Grazie.

Jul 20, 2008 8:48 am

I'm sure anon will respond in due course, but if you read his original post which you are questioning you will see it was not the GUL which purchased the LTC policy, it was the income from the SPIA that was used to buy the LTC policy.  Total premium for the two was equal to or less than the MoneyGuard, with benefits from the two policies superior to those of the combined MoneyGuard policy.

Jul 20, 2008 10:27 am
Morphius:

I'm sure anon will respond in due course, but if you read his original post which you are questioning you will see it was not the GUL which purchased the LTC policy, it was the income from the SPIA that was used to buy the LTC policy.  Total premium for the two was equal to or less than the MoneyGuard, with benefits from the two policies superior to those of the combined MoneyGuard policy.



How can the premium be less than moneyguard if moneyguard doesn't have a premium?

Jul 20, 2008 4:20 pm
Hobby Bull:
Morphius:

I'm sure anon will respond in due course, but if you read his original post which you are questioning you will see it was not the GUL which purchased the LTC policy, it was the income from the SPIA that was used to buy the LTC policy.  Total premium for the two was equal to or less than the MoneyGuard, with benefits from the two policies superior to those of the combined MoneyGuard policy.



How can the premium be less than moneyguard if moneyguard doesn't have a premium?


Now you're putting words into my mouth.  I never said the MoneyGuard had a premium - I said "the total premium of the SPIA and LTC" was less than the MoneyGuard.  Had I meant the premium of the MoneyGuard I would have said that.  I didn't.  


Jul 20, 2008 6:29 pm
Morphius:
Hobby Bull:
Morphius:

I'm sure anon will respond in due course, but if you read his original post which you are questioning you will see it was not the GUL which purchased the LTC policy, it was the income from the SPIA that was used to buy the LTC policy.  Total premium for the two was equal to or less than the MoneyGuard, with benefits from the two policies superior to those of the combined MoneyGuard policy.



How can the premium be less than moneyguard if moneyguard doesn't have a premium?


Now you're putting words into my mouth.  I never said the MoneyGuard had a premium - I said "the total premium of the SPIA and LTC" was less than the MoneyGuard.  Had I meant the premium of the MoneyGuard I would have said that.  I didn't.  




Then how is doing the spia/ltc better than doing moneyguard?

Jul 20, 2008 7:30 pm

The answer to your question is contained in anonymous' post from earlier in this thread.  I would repeat it for you but I know how sensitive you are about people wasting their time banging out answers.


Jul 20, 2008 9:07 pm

Anon,

Could you explain this piece "a GUL policy that had a greater death benefit than the MoneyGuard product and it purchased a vastly superior LTC policy"? Specifically how the GUL "purchased" a LTCI policy?

I don't think I've run across this so would like to understand how the different cogs come together.

Grazie.




 
The GUL did not purchase an LTCi policy.  The SPIA purchased both a GUL and a SPIA.
 
How can the premium be less than moneyguard if moneyguard doesn't have a premium?
 
It couldn't... except for the fact that Moneyguard has a premium.   A single premium product still has a premium.
Jul 20, 2008 11:11 pm
anonymous:

Anon,

Could you explain this piece "a GUL policy that had a greater death benefit than the MoneyGuard product and it purchased a vastly superior LTC policy"? Specifically how the GUL "purchased" a LTCI policy?

I don't think I've run across this so would like to understand how the different cogs come together.

Grazie.




 
The GUL did not purchase an LTCi policy.  The SPIA purchased both a GUL and a SPIA.
 
How can the premium be less than moneyguard if moneyguard doesn't have a premium?
 
It couldn't... except for the fact that Moneyguard has a premium.   A single premium product still has a premium.



Is it a premium, if they can take it back at any time?

Jul 20, 2008 11:12 pm
Morphius:

The answer to your question is contained in anonymous' post from earlier in this thread.  I would repeat it for you but I know how sensitive you are about people wasting their time banging out answers.




When you don't know the answer, just say "I don't know."

Jul 20, 2008 11:39 pm
Hobby Bull:
Morphius:

The answer to your question is contained in anonymous' post from earlier in this thread.  I would repeat it for you but I know how sensitive you are about people wasting their time banging out answers.



When you don't know the answer, just say "I don't know."


If you're unwilling or unable to read for yourself, just say so. 


Jul 21, 2008 8:09 am

Is it a premium, if they can take it back at any time?

 
Yes. 
Jul 21, 2008 8:14 am
anonymous:

Is it a premium, if they can take it back at any time?

 
Yes. 



Great. So....you're comparing a premium that can be taken back with one that can't. How irresponsible of you.

Jul 21, 2008 10:41 am
Great. So....you're comparing a premium that can be taken back with one that can't. How irresponsible of you.
 
We compare choices.  That's what we always do.  The money back of the MoneyGuard product is an advantage of the product, but it's still, in this case, a very poor alternative.  What are we supposed to do...not make comparisons, since it can never be apples to apples?
 
The fact that one can get there money back is just part of the decision making process.   If one doesn't want the insurance product anymore and they purchased MoneyGuard, they can get their premium back.  If someone decides that they don't want life insurance and they don't want LTCi anymore, they can cancel those policies and they will still have a SPIA that will give them a guaranteed payment for the rest of their life.  They also have the flexibility to cancel just their insurance or their LTCi at any time.