POLICYHOLDER DECLINATION OF COVERAGE LETTER
(To be signed by client to authorize cancellation of policy or pending application)
I, (Mr./Mrs./Ms.)___________________________ (Policyholder/Applicant Name), certify that I will not hold _________________________ (Consultant Name), nor COMPANY’S NAME REMOVED liable for losses or damages caused by my decision not to accept the coverage that was suggested by my COMPANY’S NAME REMOVED Consultant, ________________________ (Consultant Name). By signing this declination letter, I am attesting that I have been FULLY educated and understand all of the risks of my decision, yet still wish to decline the coverage benefits made available to me.
_______________________________________
Signature of declining policyholder/applicant
_______________________________________
Print name
___________________
Date of above signature
_______________________________________
Signature of COMPANY’S NAME REMOVED Consultant
_______________________________________
Print name
___________________
Date of above signature
This is a portion of the email it was attached to:
Also see attached declination letter use this if needed to be able to get back in the door to save any business that might be canceling.
This seems really wrong to me.
Any suggestions?
Alan
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 04:52 am Post Subject:
I think the question to be asked of the original poster is what they meant by illegal. Illegal in terms of would this waiver hold up on court or illegal to use this tactic to preserve to obtain business?
I would say it couldn't be my dec page of choice. Because I believe the use of such a thing is to document that possible coverage has been discussed and that a client has turned down a recommendation. I also see the benefit in having them commit to their decision to say no--lots of times no or maybe simply means "I don't want to deal with this today" and you aren't doing them any favors by letting them off the hook and hoping that tomorrow or next week they might change their mind.
I have a dec page for disability long term care insurance that simply says a recommendation has been made, I understand that I may not be able to get this coverage later and likely won't save any money by waiting. However I've decided to decline this coverage. I'm not asking them to waive any legal right. Simply documenting that we talked about it and they didn't want it.
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 02:52 pm Post Subject: polices-life settlement
are their really tons of policys avalible? AND AT WHAT PRICE RANGE ?
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 03:07 am Post Subject:
Take a look online - there are plenty of places to get free competitive quotes from most insurances in a flash.
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 09:12 pm Post Subject:
I would say it couldn't be my dec page of choice.
I have a dec page for disability long term care insurance that simply says a recommendation has been made, I understand that I may not be able to get this coverage later and likely won't save any money by waiting.
This has nothing to do with the dec (declarations page). A Dec page identifies the insured, insurer, policy number, policy period, usually the premium for the policy period, coverage limits, loss payees, etc. It doesn't deal with waivers, etc. discussed in this question thread.
This waiver would not be considered part of the entire contracts and is therefore not binding on the insurance contract in any manner. As I said in a previous post- there's no way on the planet that this waiver (as it's worded) would hold up in court. No way...period.
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:10 am Post Subject:
dec page short for declination of coverage, not the P&C dec page. Not a waiver, just a filed document that says we talked about it and they didn't want it. Incase they "forget" that conversation and get disabled and some attorney wants to talk about whose fault their adversity is.
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 04:08 am Post Subject:
I'd like to agree with BNTRS and InsTeacher.
However, here's my 2 cents worth:
You sit down with Mr. and Mrs. Jones and show them 3 different versions of a $1MM life insurance policy intended to cover their estate worth $5.5MM. When you attempt to close the sale, they inform you that both their CPA and attorney must be consulted first. You persist and inform them that you're even willing to take their information and submit a COD application. "No" they say, "we'll get back to you after we meet with our counsel."
Later that week, Mr. Jones is killed tragically in a car crash - and doesn't have any life insurance to speak of. When Mrs. Jones meets with her attorney, she informs him that she had met with you, selected a policy, offered to write your company a check and you refused to do business with her (and her late husband) beacause you had to "check on something better."
Now it's your word against hers, she's got a hot lawyer, $5.5MM in her checking avccount, and the name of your E&O carrier.
As an agent, can you imagine how you would react to an E&O inquiry after they've received a demand letter from her attorney?
I've seen many different versions of the letter in question and I can't say I disagree with what the agent is trying to accomplish. I believe a signed letter would weigh heavily in the case I've outlined above and an E&O company's counsel would find it very valuable.
Could this scenario be real? Could OJ be guilty? In our increasingly litigious society, this could happen in less than a heartbeat and an insuance company would pay off to avoid any potential bad exposure. Sure, it's not fair but welcome to life on planet Earth.
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 04:08 am Post Subject:
In fact, this reminds me of an Allstate case - and they paid.
Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 05:40 am Post Subject:
I've seen many instances where a plaintiff's lawyer says "boo!" and the insurer says "how much?"
For the UMPTEENTH TIME...(whew) I am NOT SAYING that PROPERLY WRITTEN waivers are BAD. They're GOOD.
POORLY written waivers cause the grim reaper to come a stalkin'. What I'm saying is that the use of a properly executed waiver can save your backside and are not only a good idea, but should be considered a requirement in certain cases.
Also remember that even though you may not lose your case, it still has to be defended and that costs money. Your E&O coverage provides for defense costs if coverage applies, but more and more carriers are placing exclusionary language in their E&O contracts that make them now look more like medical malpractice policies. There's now specific language in a lot of policies that will not pay for acts for which the agent engages in but is not qualified to do. For example- an agent plays around with an insured's estate plan without having any estate planning training or certification. Oooooops! Several states have enacted legislation that bars a person from claiming they're a "financial planner" or an "estate planner" unless they have the professional designations to back it up.
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 07:48 pm Post Subject:
Just thought I'd follow up with and post a link from an article that just came out in Insurance Journal today. "Insurance checklists and client letters are important."
http://www.mynewmarkets.com/articles/106492
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 07:58 pm Post Subject:
One problem with the post is that if someone has a policy and then signs that form because they have changed their mind, they are going to think that they have cancelled their policy and that isn't true. It may be an E&O claim waiting to happen.
On the other hand, when a client isn't doing something that they should be doing, it is smart to have this documented. The agent can have the client sign something, but the problem with this is it's tough to do it in a way that doesn't come across as slimey and gimmicky.
The better way is to simply send a letter that mentions that they have chosen not to buy XYZ that you have recommended for the following reasons.
Add your comment