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 30, 2011 01:40 pm Post Subject:
Max, holy cow. You are accusing me of not having knowledge of disability coverage?? Where the heck is your reading comprehension?
Those things, like you said, are in OPTIONAL standard policy provisions.
Top notch DI contracts do not have these optional provisions. Those are they type of provisions that make for a less than ideal contract.
Have you never looked at an individual DI contract from a top tier seller of DI?
I can't believe that you try to hold yourself out as an expert, yet you don't even have a contract from which you can reference.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:20 pm Post Subject:
So send me your sample of a "top notch" policy, and we'll see. The UNUM policy sample I have includes those provisions. And I think UNUM is in the top tier. But these days, they are concentrating on group DI, so I don't use them.
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:55 am Post Subject:
UNUM hasn't been a player in the individual market place for a long time, possibly 10 years or more.
What I'm trying to figure out is who the heck do you use for individual disability insurance. My guess is that you simply don't sell it. Guardian/Berkshire has without argument the top contract in the business. I'm not making the claim that they are best for everybody. They are not.
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:04 am Post Subject:
Max, in all seriousness, why are you trying to act as an expert on disability insurance when it is quite obvious that you don't sell the product or don't have white collar clients?
In fairness to you, I've never seen someone with a P&C license who knew much about DI.
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:25 am Post Subject:
Max,
Did you cater my sister's party or was that your kid?
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:38 am Post Subject:
Max, I need to ask you a question.
In the last 5 years have you sold an individual disability policy to a white collar professional?
If so, what company?
I'm asking because if the answer is "no", then your lack of real world knowledge makes sense.
If the answer is "yes" and you used a policy that has those types of optional clauses, you screwed your client, but you don't know it.
If the answer is "yes" and you didn't use a policy that has one of those optional clauses, you did the right thing for the client, but you never read the contract because if you did, we wouldn't be having this asanine conversation.
This conversation is only occuring because you "live and breath insurance", but you don't sell individual disability insurance to white collar employees.
Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 01:33 pm Post Subject:
Max,
Are you man enough yet to admit to your lack of knowledge?
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 06:48 am Post Subject:
Are you going to send me a copy of a policy that does what you claim? Put up or shut up.
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 05:07 pm Post Subject:
The fact that Max is asking for a copy of a policy simply reinforces that he does not sell white collar disability policies. It is pitiful that he lives and breathes insurance and at the same time knows so little about this subject.
Max, do you not have any clients who are lawyers, engineers, cpas, doctors, or other professionals? Are you just a P&C guy who sells a little life insurance on the side to go with your teaching and catering?
I'll send you a specimen contract. I know in advance that somehow it won't be good enough for you. It's ridiculous that someone who sells insurance needs another agent to produce a contract for him.
It's fine that you don't sell white collar DI. It's silly that you can't admit that you don't and that you don't understand the ins and outs.
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:39 pm Post Subject:
OK, you sent me a Mass Mutual specimen contract, with all the possible riders attached, and it demonstrates a $4500 per month benefit (far from the $10,000 one you pondered above). Thanks, I appreciate it.
Although I have only skimmed the surface, I think you have overstated the coverage in your "CONTRACT FOR A TOP WHITE COLLAR DI COMPANY". You boldly asked: "THE POLICIES ARE NON-CANCELLABLE/GUARANTEED RENEWABLE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS?" And I do, but I don't think you do, or at least you've never actually read the language of a contract to see how those words are applied in their fullest context.
It's going to take me a few hours to fully read and analyze it, but, right off the bat, what I have seen in a cursory look is this: Your "noncancellable" policy is noncancellable to age 65. It is "conditionally renewable" annually from age 65 to age 75, and the conditions of conversion/renewability at age 65 are in the endorsement (on p 45) that modifies the earlier conversion provision (on p.11) which requires a written request at least 60 days prior to policy EXPIRATION at age 65:
This Policy may be converted by You to a new policy on the Expiration Date if the Insured is actively employed at least 30 hours per week and is not Disabled.
(emphasis added)
The later endorsement states:
Conditions For Renewal
This Policy may be renewed on the Policy Anniversary that falls on or next following the Insured's 65th birthday. Renewal is conditional for one-year periods on each Policy Anniversary Date up to the Insured's 75th birthday. This Policy Anniversary Date is also the Renewal Date. This Policy may be renewed if the Insured:
-- Is not Disabled; and
-- Is actively working full-time at least 30 hours per week; and
-- Qualifies financially, based on Our Published Underwriting Limits in effect at the time of renewal.
Premiums at renewal are based on the Insured's Attained Age and rates in effect at the time of renewal.
And just in case you did not read the definition of PUBLISHED UNDERWRITING LIMITS (which parallels my business above about "relationship of earnings to insurance, that you insisted IS NOT in such a contract), on p.9 it reads:
PUBLISHED UNDERWRITING LIMITS -- The maximum amounts available based on the Insured's Age, Occupation, Income, Unearned Income, and other disability income benefits in force or applied for.
This also tells us that if the insured has other disability benefits available, this policy's limit will be reduced by that amount (so that the total of all benefits payable does not exceed Mass Mutual's underwriting limits for the insured).
So let's go back to the OP's post, where he says he is age 67. I'll even assume he has this same Mass Mutual policy with all the riders -- except that all the riders end at age 65 (see the policy specifications ("page 2 of 5") (p. 4 of the brochure you sent), so we don't need to discuss those now.
Now he wants to renew the policy under the terms and conditions applicable to age 75 shown above. But take a closer look at what he wrote:
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?
I don't know how well you understand contracts or contract law, and I have no idea what you believe this says, but here's what I know it says, because it's written in plain English:
If he's not working at least 30 hours per week, he doesn't qualify to renew. If he's disabled, he's not qualified to renew, If he is not "financially qualified", he's not qualified to renew.
The OP doesn't indicate whether he's still working (I suspect not) But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume he's pushing shopping carts at WalMart 30 hours a week at the time of his disability he now has at age 67.
At age 65, he can convert and renew his policy if he is "financially qualified", and we'll assume he did. But I also have to assume that at WalMart, he is not even close to being financially qualified for $4500 per month. His 30 hours per week, even at $12 per hour, add up to $360/week, $1560 per month (4.3 weeks). So he might be financially qualified for $1000-$1200 per month. So, we'll let him convert and renew, and now that he's disabled can he file a claim?
YES. But the terms of the endorsement and other contract language only provide for up to 24 months of benefit, and he would not be able to renew at the end of that time unless he was not disabled and still working 30 hours per week. And he's not collecting the $4500 per month benefit he had prior to age 65.
Max, with a good individual disability policy, one doesn't need income to obtain a benefit.
That's patently incorrect, as I already stated. If it wasn't important to have an income, on p.8 of the contract there would be no need for the definition of INCOME:
INCOME -- Gross earnings of the Insured from his/her personal activity in any profession{s) or buslness(es). If the Insured's vocation involves ownership of any portion of any profession or business, including any corporation, Income includes his/her share of the earnings of that profession or business due to such ownership. We will deduct from gross
earnings any amount which is deductible as a business
expense for Federal Income Tax purposes. Income does not include:
-- investment income;
-- rent;
-- royalties;
-- deferred compensation payments from plans executed more than 30 days prior to Disability;
-- retirement income;
-- other disability income benefits in force or applied for.
And here's the definition of OCCUPATION:
OCCUPATION -- The Insured's regular profession(s) or business{es) at the start of Disability.
Not working at the time of a disability? Then one has no occupation in which to earn an income. That's the way I read the contract. Do you read it differently?
For now, I'm sticking by my previous assertions that most or all of what you have premised in your responses, and in your wild hypothetical about a $10,000 per month benefit for a non-working person, is not accurate according to the language of this TOP NOTCH WHITE COLLAR DI POLICY specimen you provided. It is not significantly different from "lesser" DI contracts.
But in all fairness to the discussion, I'll continue my analysis, and have more to post in another day or two.
In the meantime, you might want to read what you sent me, too. Because I really don't think you understand insurance contracts as loudly as you proclaim. And that puts your clients at a disadvantage if they are relying on your understanding of insurance contracts.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 01:40 pm Post Subject:
Max, holy cow. You are accusing me of not having knowledge of disability coverage?? Where the heck is your reading comprehension?
Those things, like you said, are in OPTIONAL standard policy provisions.
Top notch DI contracts do not have these optional provisions. Those are they type of provisions that make for a less than ideal contract.
Have you never looked at an individual DI contract from a top tier seller of DI?
I can't believe that you try to hold yourself out as an expert, yet you don't even have a contract from which you can reference.
Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2011 11:20 pm Post Subject:
So send me your sample of a "top notch" policy, and we'll see. The UNUM policy sample I have includes those provisions. And I think UNUM is in the top tier. But these days, they are concentrating on group DI, so I don't use them.
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:55 am Post Subject:
UNUM hasn't been a player in the individual market place for a long time, possibly 10 years or more.
What I'm trying to figure out is who the heck do you use for individual disability insurance. My guess is that you simply don't sell it. Guardian/Berkshire has without argument the top contract in the business. I'm not making the claim that they are best for everybody. They are not.
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:04 am Post Subject:
Max, in all seriousness, why are you trying to act as an expert on disability insurance when it is quite obvious that you don't sell the product or don't have white collar clients?
In fairness to you, I've never seen someone with a P&C license who knew much about DI.
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:25 am Post Subject:
Max,
Did you cater my sister's party or was that your kid?
Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:38 am Post Subject:
Max, I need to ask you a question.
In the last 5 years have you sold an individual disability policy to a white collar professional?
If so, what company?
I'm asking because if the answer is "no", then your lack of real world knowledge makes sense.
If the answer is "yes" and you used a policy that has those types of optional clauses, you screwed your client, but you don't know it.
If the answer is "yes" and you didn't use a policy that has one of those optional clauses, you did the right thing for the client, but you never read the contract because if you did, we wouldn't be having this asanine conversation.
This conversation is only occuring because you "live and breath insurance", but you don't sell individual disability insurance to white collar employees.
Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 01:33 pm Post Subject:
Max,
Are you man enough yet to admit to your lack of knowledge?
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 06:48 am Post Subject:
Are you going to send me a copy of a policy that does what you claim? Put up or shut up.
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 05:07 pm Post Subject:
The fact that Max is asking for a copy of a policy simply reinforces that he does not sell white collar disability policies. It is pitiful that he lives and breathes insurance and at the same time knows so little about this subject.
Max, do you not have any clients who are lawyers, engineers, cpas, doctors, or other professionals? Are you just a P&C guy who sells a little life insurance on the side to go with your teaching and catering?
I'll send you a specimen contract. I know in advance that somehow it won't be good enough for you. It's ridiculous that someone who sells insurance needs another agent to produce a contract for him.
It's fine that you don't sell white collar DI. It's silly that you can't admit that you don't and that you don't understand the ins and outs.
Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:39 pm Post Subject:
OK, you sent me a Mass Mutual specimen contract, with all the possible riders attached, and it demonstrates a $4500 per month benefit (far from the $10,000 one you pondered above). Thanks, I appreciate it.
Although I have only skimmed the surface, I think you have overstated the coverage in your "CONTRACT FOR A TOP WHITE COLLAR DI COMPANY". You boldly asked: "THE POLICIES ARE NON-CANCELLABLE/GUARANTEED RENEWABLE. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS?" And I do, but I don't think you do, or at least you've never actually read the language of a contract to see how those words are applied in their fullest context.
It's going to take me a few hours to fully read and analyze it, but, right off the bat, what I have seen in a cursory look is this: Your "noncancellable" policy is noncancellable to age 65. It is "conditionally renewable" annually from age 65 to age 75, and the conditions of conversion/renewability at age 65 are in the endorsement (on p 45) that modifies the earlier conversion provision (on p.11) which requires a written request at least 60 days prior to policy EXPIRATION at age 65:
This Policy may be converted by You to a new policy on the Expiration Date if the Insured is actively employed at least 30 hours per week and is not Disabled.
(emphasis added)The later endorsement states:
Conditions For Renewal
This Policy may be renewed on the Policy Anniversary that falls on or next following the Insured's 65th birthday. Renewal is conditional for one-year periods on each Policy Anniversary Date up to the Insured's 75th birthday. This Policy Anniversary Date is also the Renewal Date. This Policy may be renewed if the Insured:
-- Is not Disabled; and
-- Is actively working full-time at least 30 hours per week; and
-- Qualifies financially, based on Our Published Underwriting Limits in effect at the time of renewal.
Premiums at renewal are based on the Insured's Attained Age and rates in effect at the time of renewal.
And just in case you did not read the definition of PUBLISHED UNDERWRITING LIMITS (which parallels my business above about "relationship of earnings to insurance, that you insisted IS NOT in such a contract), on p.9 it reads:
PUBLISHED UNDERWRITING LIMITS -- The maximum amounts available based on the Insured's Age, Occupation, Income, Unearned Income, and other disability income benefits in force or applied for.
This also tells us that if the insured has other disability benefits available, this policy's limit will be reduced by that amount (so that the total of all benefits payable does not exceed Mass Mutual's underwriting limits for the insured).
So let's go back to the OP's post, where he says he is age 67. I'll even assume he has this same Mass Mutual policy with all the riders -- except that all the riders end at age 65 (see the policy specifications ("page 2 of 5") (p. 4 of the brochure you sent), so we don't need to discuss those now.
Now he wants to renew the policy under the terms and conditions applicable to age 75 shown above. But take a closer look at what he wrote:
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?
I don't know how well you understand contracts or contract law, and I have no idea what you believe this says, but here's what I know it says, because it's written in plain English:
If he's not working at least 30 hours per week, he doesn't qualify to renew. If he's disabled, he's not qualified to renew, If he is not "financially qualified", he's not qualified to renew.
The OP doesn't indicate whether he's still working (I suspect not) But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume he's pushing shopping carts at WalMart 30 hours a week at the time of his disability he now has at age 67.
At age 65, he can convert and renew his policy if he is "financially qualified", and we'll assume he did. But I also have to assume that at WalMart, he is not even close to being financially qualified for $4500 per month. His 30 hours per week, even at $12 per hour, add up to $360/week, $1560 per month (4.3 weeks). So he might be financially qualified for $1000-$1200 per month. So, we'll let him convert and renew, and now that he's disabled can he file a claim?
YES. But the terms of the endorsement and other contract language only provide for up to 24 months of benefit, and he would not be able to renew at the end of that time unless he was not disabled and still working 30 hours per week. And he's not collecting the $4500 per month benefit he had prior to age 65.
Max, with a good individual disability policy, one doesn't need income to obtain a benefit.
That's patently incorrect, as I already stated. If it wasn't important to have an income, on p.8 of the contract there would be no need for the definition of INCOME:
INCOME -- Gross earnings of the Insured from his/her personal activity in any profession{s) or buslness(es). If the Insured's vocation involves ownership of any portion of any profession or business, including any corporation, Income includes his/her share of the earnings of that profession or business due to such ownership. We will deduct from gross
earnings any amount which is deductible as a business
expense for Federal Income Tax purposes. Income does not include:
-- investment income;
-- rent;
-- royalties;
-- deferred compensation payments from plans executed more than 30 days prior to Disability;
-- retirement income;
-- other disability income benefits in force or applied for.
And here's the definition of OCCUPATION:
OCCUPATION -- The Insured's regular profession(s) or business{es) at the start of Disability.
Not working at the time of a disability? Then one has no occupation in which to earn an income. That's the way I read the contract. Do you read it differently?
For now, I'm sticking by my previous assertions that most or all of what you have premised in your responses, and in your wild hypothetical about a $10,000 per month benefit for a non-working person, is not accurate according to the language of this TOP NOTCH WHITE COLLAR DI POLICY specimen you provided. It is not significantly different from "lesser" DI contracts.
But in all fairness to the discussion, I'll continue my analysis, and have more to post in another day or two.
In the meantime, you might want to read what you sent me, too. Because I really don't think you understand insurance contracts as loudly as you proclaim. And that puts your clients at a disadvantage if they are relying on your understanding of insurance contracts.
Add your comment