I am 67 and have become disabled, I do have a disability insurance. Can I claim benefits even after the fact that I’ve reached retirement age?
Total Comments: 30
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:47 pm Post Subject:
You should check the benefit period mentioned in your policy.
There should be a section related to this topic in your policy.
Depending upon your individual disability coverage, you might be eligible for disability coverage after retirement age or benefits payable after age 65.
This usually requires you to be working full time for a specified period of time. Go through your policy looking for the required criteria.
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 05:21 am Post Subject:
Most, but not all, disability income policies require that your disability begin prior to age 65. This is because, according to Social Security's "rules", there are no disabled persons in America after age 65.
Also, most disability income policies are "means tested" -- you have to have earned income in order obtain a benefit.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 03:20 pm Post Subject:
Max, with a good individual disability policy, one doesn't need income to obtain a benefit.
Ex. Max has a $10,000/month benefit from Guardian which he got when he was working as a CPA. He quit his job to become a garbage man for $7/hour. He decided to keep his policy. 3 months ago, he got laid off from his garbage man job. He hasn't been able to find work. Yesterday, he had a major stroke and isn't expected to recover. Max will collect $10,000 month.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 01:28 am Post Subject:
Ex. Max has a $10,000/month benefit from Guardian which he got when he was working as a CPA. He quit his job to become a garbage man for $7/hour. He decided to keep his policy. 3 months ago, he got laid off from his garbage man job. He hasn't been able to find work. Yesterday, he had a major stroke and isn't expected to recover. Max will collect $10,000 month.
You are so full of BULLS*** on this it's not even funny.
Disability Income Insurance is a "means tested" product. Insurable interest lies in your provable income. Having lost the $10,000 job means losing most of the $10,000 benefit. You either don't understand, or you have never read the provision in a DI policy that requires the insured to notify the insurer of a change in occupation or risk category.
And how would you interpret this policy provision, as worded in the CA Insurance Code (Section 10369.7):
Relation of Earnings to Insurance: If the total monthly amount of loss of time benefits promised for the same loss under all valid loss of time coverage upon the insured, whether payable on a weekly or monthly basis, shall exceed the monthly earnings of the insured at the time disability commenced or his average monthly earnings for the period of two years immediately preceding a disability for which claim is made, whichever is the greater, the insurer will be liable only for such proportionate amount of such benefits under this policy
as the amount of such monthly earnings or such average monthly earnings of the insured bears to the total amount of monthly benefits for the same loss under all such coverage upon the insured at the time such disability commences and for the return of such part of the premiums paid during such two years as shall exceed the pro-rata amount of the premiums for the benefits actually paid hereunder; but this shall not operate to reduce the total monthly amount of benefits payable under all such coverage upon the insured below the sum of two hundred dollars ($200) or the sum of the monthly benefits specified in such coverages, whichever is the lesser, nor shall it operate to reduce benefits other than those payable for loss of time.
No matter how you read it -- one policy or multiple policies -- no one is getting $10,000 per month under your scenario above. And I'll even give you just a couple of months on the job as the garbage man. Two year's average wages will be less than his income as the CPA.
And no DI policy will pay 100% of pretax income for obvious reasons.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:26 pm Post Subject:
You are so full of BULLS*** on this it's not even funny.
Disability Income Insurance is a "means tested" product. Insurable interest lies in your provable income.
THAT IS TRUE, BUT ONLY AT TIME OF APPLICATION!
Having lost the $10,000 job means losing most of the $10,000 benefit. You either don't understand, or you have never read the provision in a DI policy that requires the insured to notify the insurer of a change in occupation or risk category.
READ A CONTRACT FOR A TOP WHITE COLLAR DI COMPANY (Guardian/Berkshire, MassMutual, Northwestern Mutual, etc.). THE POLICIES ARE NON-CANCELLABLE/GUARANTEED RENEWABLE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS? I GUESS NOT. IT MEANS THAT THEY ARE STUCK WITH THE CPA TURNED GARBAGE MAN AND NOTHING IN THE CONTRACT CHANGES. HIS OCCUPATION IS NOW “GARBAGE MAN”. IF YOU ARE WILLING TO LEARN, YOU’LL TAKE THE TIME TO READ AN ACTUAL CONTRACT. YOU WON’T FIND A PROVISION REQUIRING THE INSURED TO NOTIFY THE INSURER OF AN OCCUPATION OR RISK CATEGORY CHANGE. THIS SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST WITH A GOOD CONTRACT.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:28 pm Post Subject:
And how would you interpret this policy provision, as worded in the CA Insurance Code (Section 10369.7):
IT IS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE IT IS AN OPTIONAL PROVISION AND IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOP WHITE COLLAR DISABILITY CONTRACTS.
And no DI policy will pay 100% of pretax income for obvious reasons.
INCORRECT. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS ONLY TRUE AT TIME OF APPLICATION. WITH A GOOD CONTRACT, A CHANGE IN INCOME OR THE ADDITION OF OTHER COVERAGE (typically employer paid group) WILL DO NOTHING TO CHANGE THE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE THAT ONE HAS WITH THEIR INDIVIDUAL POLICY.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:30 pm Post Subject:
Max, please "man up".
Take a look at a top notch contract and admit to your errors or show us where I'm wrong.
I'm right which means that you won't do this.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 08:32 pm Post Subject:
Take a look at a top notch contract
Post the relevant policy provisions for "CHANGE OF OCCUPATION" and "RELATIONSHIP OF EARNINGS TO INSURANCE" from any of the policies you cite and we'll see. If I'm wrong, I'll say so.
Also, if you look to the original post, the OP states he is age as 67. I know of no non-cancellable DI policies that continue as non-cancellable after age 65, if they can even be renewed, unless the disability occurred prior to age 65 (possibly even earlier). The simple reason for this is that our federal government has declared that there are no (Social Security) disabled persons after age 65. When they get around to changing the retirement age to Mitch McConnell's "more reasonable age ... like 72" that may change.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:37 am Post Subject:
Post the relevant policy provisions for "CHANGE OF OCCUPATION" and "RELATIONSHIP OF EARNINGS TO INSURANCE" from any of the policies you cite and we'll see. If I'm wrong, I'll say so.
It's right next to the policy provisions for "ALIEN ABDUCTION".
You are asking me to do the impossible. I can't post the policy provisions for those parts of the contracts because they don't exist.
Please just take a look at one of those policies. I promise that I'm correct.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:24 pm Post Subject:
I can't post the policy provisions for those parts of the contracts because they don't exist.
Well, now it's obvious that you have NO KNOWLEDGE of disability insurance. Both of those provisions are part of the NAIC Model "Uniform Individual Accident and Sickness Provisions Act", under the heading "Optional Provisions", and the NAIC uniform provisions have been adopted in whole or in part by all the states. There are 12 mandatory provisions and 11 optional provision in the NAIC Model Act.
You can read all about them here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.html/ins_table_of_contents.html
Look at Sections 10320-10369.12 in the CA Insurance Code. You will find the same sorts of things in all other states' insurance codes. Sections 10350-10354 discuss the COMPULSORY (aka MANDATORY) standard policy provisions, and 10369.1-10369.12 discuss the OPTIONAL standard policy provisions. California has added a few of its own to both lists.
For example, right off the top, Section 10369.2 states:
Change of Occupation: If the insured be injured or contract sickness after having changed his occupation to one classified by the insurer as more hazardous than that stated in this policy or while doing for compensation anything pertaining to an occupation so classified, the insurer will pay only such portion of the indemnities provided in this policy as the premium paid would have purchased at the rates and within the limits fixed by the insurer for such more hazardous occupation. If the insured changes his occupation to one classified by the insurer as less hazardous than that stated in this policy, the insurer, upon receipt of proof of such change of occupation, will reduce the premium rate accordingly, and will return the excess pro-rata unearned premium from the date of change of occupation or from the policy anniversary date immediately preceding receipt of such proof, whichever is the more recent. In applying this provision, the classification of occupational risk and the premium rates shall be such as have been last filed by the insurer prior to the occurrence of the loss for which the insurer is liable or prior to date of proof of change in occupation with the state official having supervision of insurance in the state where the insured resided at the time this policy was issued; but if such filing was not required, then the classification of occupational risk and the premium rates shall be those last made effective by the insurer in such state prior to the occurrence of the loss or prior to the date of proof of change in occupation.
And Section 10369.7 describes the provision RELATION OF EARNINGS TO INSURANCE.
Please just take a look at one of those policies. I promise that I'm correct.
Send me copies of any that you have, I'll be happy to look and report my findings.
Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:47 pm Post Subject:
You should check the benefit period mentioned in your policy.
There should be a section related to this topic in your policy.
Depending upon your individual disability coverage, you might be eligible for disability coverage after retirement age or benefits payable after age 65.
This usually requires you to be working full time for a specified period of time. Go through your policy looking for the required criteria.
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 05:21 am Post Subject:
Most, but not all, disability income policies require that your disability begin prior to age 65. This is because, according to Social Security's "rules", there are no disabled persons in America after age 65.
Also, most disability income policies are "means tested" -- you have to have earned income in order obtain a benefit.
Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 03:20 pm Post Subject:
Max, with a good individual disability policy, one doesn't need income to obtain a benefit.
Ex. Max has a $10,000/month benefit from Guardian which he got when he was working as a CPA. He quit his job to become a garbage man for $7/hour. He decided to keep his policy. 3 months ago, he got laid off from his garbage man job. He hasn't been able to find work. Yesterday, he had a major stroke and isn't expected to recover. Max will collect $10,000 month.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 01:28 am Post Subject:
Ex. Max has a $10,000/month benefit from Guardian which he got when he was working as a CPA. He quit his job to become a garbage man for $7/hour. He decided to keep his policy. 3 months ago, he got laid off from his garbage man job. He hasn't been able to find work. Yesterday, he had a major stroke and isn't expected to recover. Max will collect $10,000 month.
You are so full of BULLS*** on this it's not even funny.
Disability Income Insurance is a "means tested" product. Insurable interest lies in your provable income. Having lost the $10,000 job means losing most of the $10,000 benefit. You either don't understand, or you have never read the provision in a DI policy that requires the insured to notify the insurer of a change in occupation or risk category.
And how would you interpret this policy provision, as worded in the CA Insurance Code (Section 10369.7):
Relation of Earnings to Insurance: If the total monthly amount of loss of time benefits promised for the same loss under all valid loss of time coverage upon the insured, whether payable on a weekly or monthly basis, shall exceed the monthly earnings of the insured at the time disability commenced or his average monthly earnings for the period of two years immediately preceding a disability for which claim is made, whichever is the greater, the insurer will be liable only for such proportionate amount of such benefits under this policy
as the amount of such monthly earnings or such average monthly earnings of the insured bears to the total amount of monthly benefits for the same loss under all such coverage upon the insured at the time such disability commences and for the return of such part of the premiums paid during such two years as shall exceed the pro-rata amount of the premiums for the benefits actually paid hereunder; but this shall not operate to reduce the total monthly amount of benefits payable under all such coverage upon the insured below the sum of two hundred dollars ($200) or the sum of the monthly benefits specified in such coverages, whichever is the lesser, nor shall it operate to reduce benefits other than those payable for loss of time.
No matter how you read it -- one policy or multiple policies -- no one is getting $10,000 per month under your scenario above. And I'll even give you just a couple of months on the job as the garbage man. Two year's average wages will be less than his income as the CPA.
And no DI policy will pay 100% of pretax income for obvious reasons.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:26 pm Post Subject:
You are so full of BULLS*** on this it's not even funny.
Disability Income Insurance is a "means tested" product. Insurable interest lies in your provable income.
THAT IS TRUE, BUT ONLY AT TIME OF APPLICATION!
Having lost the $10,000 job means losing most of the $10,000 benefit. You either don't understand, or you have never read the provision in a DI policy that requires the insured to notify the insurer of a change in occupation or risk category.
READ A CONTRACT FOR A TOP WHITE COLLAR DI COMPANY (Guardian/Berkshire, MassMutual, Northwestern Mutual, etc.). THE POLICIES ARE NON-CANCELLABLE/GUARANTEED RENEWABLE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS? I GUESS NOT. IT MEANS THAT THEY ARE STUCK WITH THE CPA TURNED GARBAGE MAN AND NOTHING IN THE CONTRACT CHANGES. HIS OCCUPATION IS NOW “GARBAGE MAN”. IF YOU ARE WILLING TO LEARN, YOU’LL TAKE THE TIME TO READ AN ACTUAL CONTRACT. YOU WON’T FIND A PROVISION REQUIRING THE INSURED TO NOTIFY THE INSURER OF AN OCCUPATION OR RISK CATEGORY CHANGE. THIS SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST WITH A GOOD CONTRACT.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:28 pm Post Subject:
And how would you interpret this policy provision, as worded in the CA Insurance Code (Section 10369.7):
IT IS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE IT IS AN OPTIONAL PROVISION AND IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOP WHITE COLLAR DISABILITY CONTRACTS.
And no DI policy will pay 100% of pretax income for obvious reasons.
INCORRECT. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS ONLY TRUE AT TIME OF APPLICATION. WITH A GOOD CONTRACT, A CHANGE IN INCOME OR THE ADDITION OF OTHER COVERAGE (typically employer paid group) WILL DO NOTHING TO CHANGE THE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE THAT ONE HAS WITH THEIR INDIVIDUAL POLICY.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:30 pm Post Subject:
Max, please "man up".
Take a look at a top notch contract and admit to your errors or show us where I'm wrong.
I'm right which means that you won't do this.
Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 08:32 pm Post Subject:
Take a look at a top notch contract
Post the relevant policy provisions for "CHANGE OF OCCUPATION" and "RELATIONSHIP OF EARNINGS TO INSURANCE" from any of the policies you cite and we'll see. If I'm wrong, I'll say so.
Also, if you look to the original post, the OP states he is age as 67. I know of no non-cancellable DI policies that continue as non-cancellable after age 65, if they can even be renewed, unless the disability occurred prior to age 65 (possibly even earlier). The simple reason for this is that our federal government has declared that there are no (Social Security) disabled persons after age 65. When they get around to changing the retirement age to Mitch McConnell's "more reasonable age ... like 72" that may change.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:37 am Post Subject:
Post the relevant policy provisions for "CHANGE OF OCCUPATION" and "RELATIONSHIP OF EARNINGS TO INSURANCE" from any of the policies you cite and we'll see. If I'm wrong, I'll say so.
It's right next to the policy provisions for "ALIEN ABDUCTION".
You are asking me to do the impossible. I can't post the policy provisions for those parts of the contracts because they don't exist.
Please just take a look at one of those policies. I promise that I'm correct.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:24 pm Post Subject:
I can't post the policy provisions for those parts of the contracts because they don't exist.
Well, now it's obvious that you have NO KNOWLEDGE of disability insurance. Both of those provisions are part of the NAIC Model "Uniform Individual Accident and Sickness Provisions Act", under the heading "Optional Provisions", and the NAIC uniform provisions have been adopted in whole or in part by all the states. There are 12 mandatory provisions and 11 optional provision in the NAIC Model Act.
You can read all about them here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.html/ins_table_of_contents.html
Look at Sections 10320-10369.12 in the CA Insurance Code. You will find the same sorts of things in all other states' insurance codes. Sections 10350-10354 discuss the COMPULSORY (aka MANDATORY) standard policy provisions, and 10369.1-10369.12 discuss the OPTIONAL standard policy provisions. California has added a few of its own to both lists.
For example, right off the top, Section 10369.2 states:
Change of Occupation: If the insured be injured or contract sickness after having changed his occupation to one classified by the insurer as more hazardous than that stated in this policy or while doing for compensation anything pertaining to an occupation so classified, the insurer will pay only such portion of the indemnities provided in this policy as the premium paid would have purchased at the rates and within the limits fixed by the insurer for such more hazardous occupation. If the insured changes his occupation to one classified by the insurer as less hazardous than that stated in this policy, the insurer, upon receipt of proof of such change of occupation, will reduce the premium rate accordingly, and will return the excess pro-rata unearned premium from the date of change of occupation or from the policy anniversary date immediately preceding receipt of such proof, whichever is the more recent. In applying this provision, the classification of occupational risk and the premium rates shall be such as have been last filed by the insurer prior to the occurrence of the loss for which the insurer is liable or prior to date of proof of change in occupation with the state official having supervision of insurance in the state where the insured resided at the time this policy was issued; but if such filing was not required, then the classification of occupational risk and the premium rates shall be those last made effective by the insurer in such state prior to the occurrence of the loss or prior to the date of proof of change in occupation.
And Section 10369.7 describes the provision RELATION OF EARNINGS TO INSURANCE.
Please just take a look at one of those policies. I promise that I'm correct.
Send me copies of any that you have, I'll be happy to look and report my findings.
Add your comment