by Guest » Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:11 pm
Max has made the statement that one can't insure another person without their consent. He has the mistaken belief that an insured must sign an insurance application. He doesn't understand that this is not the case if the insured doesn't need to answer questions.
Instead of continuing to have people make fun of him, here is the proof:
(won't let me post the link. Look up Petersen International Underwriter and look at their application for Confidential life insurance. piu.org/applications/ConfidentialLifeApplication.pdf)
How can this be done? Simple. It takes an insurer who is willing to do this combined with the fact that Max is wrong about the insured needing to be a party to the insurance contract. You do notice that the insured does not sign this application.
Max, I challenge you to find any law that makes it a requirement that the insured MUST be a party to the insurance contract. You won't find it. Sometimes we believe something for so long that it must be true.
I'm looking forward to you starting a thread acknowledging that you don't know what you don't know.
Instead of continuing to have people make fun of him, here is the proof:
(won't let me post the link. Look up Petersen International Underwriter and look at their application for Confidential life insurance. piu.org/applications/ConfidentialLifeApplication.pdf)
How can this be done? Simple. It takes an insurer who is willing to do this combined with the fact that Max is wrong about the insured needing to be a party to the insurance contract. You do notice that the insured does not sign this application.
Max, I challenge you to find any law that makes it a requirement that the insured MUST be a party to the insurance contract. You won't find it. Sometimes we believe something for so long that it must be true.
I'm looking forward to you starting a thread acknowledging that you don't know what you don't know.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:32 pm Post Subject:
Fine, a policy from a syndicate at Lloyd's of London. Not subject to the laws of the United States. Probably on Mars, you can do that, too. Annual Renewable Term. Significant exclusions, probably much more to avoid the claim can be found in the actual contract, too. Contract terminates if the insurable interest terminates. Not at all like a bonafide insurance contract issued in the United States.
But even their own brochure describes the applicant as the "third party." I'm still waiting for you to tell me who you think Party One and Party Two are.
And I don't see anything there about insuring the car or the horse.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 02:24 pm Post Subject:
Are you trying to say that Petersen's International Underwriters, a company from Valencia California is not bound by the laws of the U.S.?
If I have an insurable interest in your life and you are not my wife, can I buy insurance on you in the state of California without your signature or knowlege? The answer is yes.
There is nothing not bonafide about a 1 year term policy.
Disability buy-out policies also won't pay if the buy-sell agreement terminates.
One must be a licensed insurance agent to sell the coverage.
It may not be as good as other coverage, but it's legal and legit.
From the standpoint of the contract, the insured is the third party. From the standpoint of the insured, the applicant is the third party.
Now, please, keep up your part of the bargain. You were told something was possible. You said that it wasn't. You have been proven wrong.
Add your comment