What should I consider before purchasing insurance!
Total Comments: 21
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 06:58 am Post Subject:
You should first of all think about your coverage needs. It would help you while shopping for a policy. Once you've identified your coverage needs (or the risks that you have), you should now think of the cost that you'd be able to bear.
Thus, you may pick the policy that offers all/most of your required benefits at a price that suits your pocket. Roddick
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 03:30 am Post Subject:
Your human life value and the rating system that determines the financial strength of an insurance company. The. Think about what's most important with regards to what you want to have happen if you are no longer around to make it happen.
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:48 am Post Subject:
Your human life value and the rating system that determines the financial strength of an insurance company.
I haven't heard anyone use the term "human life value" in about 100 years. It's so "1920" that your use of the term seems somewhat antiquated.
Please don't tell me that your company is having you use the Human Life Value approach as a method of determining how much life insurance a person needs...please tell me it ain't so! :shock:
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 04:24 am Post Subject:
Nope we're using the capital needs anaylsis with dec pages that require the client to sign off on the fact that we are making recommendations for as little coverage as we can possible recommend.
I've never had a conversation with a widow or widower who mentioned that she/he really didn't need all that death benefit.
In truth, I very rarely write policies based on human life value, but I'm not about to ignore it. The client has a right to know and I have a responsibility to exlain to them the full amount of insurance they would be eligible to have. Call me crazy, or "antiquated" as you put it.
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 08:52 pm Post Subject:
Why would you ever recommend as little as possible?
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 09:00 pm Post Subject:
Why would you ever recommend as little as possible?
I too am curious about that one :shock:
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 02:42 am Post Subject:
This is why I too am confused by the capital needs analysis.
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 02:08 am Post Subject:
I take it we are talking about Life insurance particularly?
While there are some things you need to consider irrespective of insurance type, health and life really have their own set of key criteria
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 05:28 am Post Subject:
Needs analysis is really the only way to go. The problem with this approach is that most agents don't know how to properly apply the principle. It's not that they don't have an idea of what they're talking about, it's that in order to do an analysis properly, you need more than just a meeting with a client.
Proper needs analysis should usually be done by someone with a financial planning background and preferably a CFP or ChFC designation. Frankly, when I see poorly trained producers attempt an analysis, I usually get worried. I have had to "fix" so many pathetic tries that I just shake my head. I worked my butt off to get the designations I have and feel the after-effect when producers go where they shouldn't.
Now for the average "Johnny Paycheck" making $50k a year, often there isn't much planning out there that's apparent to the typical agent. He sees a house, a few kids and some credit card stuff and doesn't even consider estate issues. Granted, that type of client rarely has estate issues due to the small estate amount, but there are almost always lawyers and probate involved unless proper planning is involved. Oh yeah--- proper planning.
How many agents are aware of even the simplest estate tools? How many agents know what the proper use of trusts can do for even the most common client? It's the little things that differentiate those in this profession. The everyday agent doesn't take the time or effort necessary to really learn their profession.
There's quite a few people in this forum that really know what they're talking about and don't proffer information unless they know what they're writing. We appreciate that. Back to the discussion.
Human Value Approach? Tell me how you're actually making that work. In this day and age, how can it possibly be truly effective? Back in the day when Dr. Huebner invented the approach- it was the right idea. Keep in mind he was the first and there weren't any other ideas. The simple notion of taking a person's annual earnings, years until retirement and adding in a capitalization rate to account for the best guess at inflation, you arrived at a supposed face amount that takes care of every need at the death of the insured.
Great in 1895, not so much now. Too many variables. Things have changed too much. Now I welcome any comments to either disprove my statements or to show me how this antiquated theory actually works today.
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:55 am Post Subject:
that require the client to sign off on the fact that we are making recommendations for as little coverage as we can possible recommend.
I still didn't get the answer to why? why, would you recommend as little as possible? oh wait, or are you saying if the client does not bite on the 'human life value' you're having them sign off that they were offered this but declined it for the lowest possible? If that's the case I get it..
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 06:58 am Post Subject:
You should first of all think about your coverage needs. It would help you while shopping for a policy. Once you've identified your coverage needs (or the risks that you have), you should now think of the cost that you'd be able to bear.
Thus, you may pick the policy that offers all/most of your required benefits at a price that suits your pocket. Roddick
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 03:30 am Post Subject:
Your human life value and the rating system that determines the financial strength of an insurance company. The. Think about what's most important with regards to what you want to have happen if you are no longer around to make it happen.
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:48 am Post Subject:
Your human life value and the rating system that determines the financial strength of an insurance company.
I haven't heard anyone use the term "human life value" in about 100 years. It's so "1920" that your use of the term seems somewhat antiquated.
Please don't tell me that your company is having you use the Human Life Value approach as a method of determining how much life insurance a person needs...please tell me it ain't so! :shock:
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 04:24 am Post Subject:
Nope we're using the capital needs anaylsis with dec pages that require the client to sign off on the fact that we are making recommendations for as little coverage as we can possible recommend.
I've never had a conversation with a widow or widower who mentioned that she/he really didn't need all that death benefit.
In truth, I very rarely write policies based on human life value, but I'm not about to ignore it. The client has a right to know and I have a responsibility to exlain to them the full amount of insurance they would be eligible to have. Call me crazy, or "antiquated" as you put it.
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 08:52 pm Post Subject:
Why would you ever recommend as little as possible?
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 09:00 pm Post Subject:
Why would you ever recommend as little as possible?
I too am curious about that one :shock:Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 02:42 am Post Subject:
This is why I too am confused by the capital needs analysis.
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 02:08 am Post Subject:
I take it we are talking about Life insurance particularly?
While there are some things you need to consider irrespective of insurance type, health and life really have their own set of key criteria
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 05:28 am Post Subject:
Needs analysis is really the only way to go. The problem with this approach is that most agents don't know how to properly apply the principle. It's not that they don't have an idea of what they're talking about, it's that in order to do an analysis properly, you need more than just a meeting with a client.
Proper needs analysis should usually be done by someone with a financial planning background and preferably a CFP or ChFC designation. Frankly, when I see poorly trained producers attempt an analysis, I usually get worried. I have had to "fix" so many pathetic tries that I just shake my head. I worked my butt off to get the designations I have and feel the after-effect when producers go where they shouldn't.
Now for the average "Johnny Paycheck" making $50k a year, often there isn't much planning out there that's apparent to the typical agent. He sees a house, a few kids and some credit card stuff and doesn't even consider estate issues. Granted, that type of client rarely has estate issues due to the small estate amount, but there are almost always lawyers and probate involved unless proper planning is involved. Oh yeah--- proper planning.
How many agents are aware of even the simplest estate tools? How many agents know what the proper use of trusts can do for even the most common client? It's the little things that differentiate those in this profession. The everyday agent doesn't take the time or effort necessary to really learn their profession.
There's quite a few people in this forum that really know what they're talking about and don't proffer information unless they know what they're writing. We appreciate that. Back to the discussion.
Human Value Approach? Tell me how you're actually making that work. In this day and age, how can it possibly be truly effective? Back in the day when Dr. Huebner invented the approach- it was the right idea. Keep in mind he was the first and there weren't any other ideas. The simple notion of taking a person's annual earnings, years until retirement and adding in a capitalization rate to account for the best guess at inflation, you arrived at a supposed face amount that takes care of every need at the death of the insured.
Great in 1895, not so much now. Too many variables. Things have changed too much. Now I welcome any comments to either disprove my statements or to show me how this antiquated theory actually works today.
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:55 am Post Subject:
that require the client to sign off on the fact that we are making recommendations for as little coverage as we can possible recommend.
I still didn't get the answer to why? why, would you recommend as little as possible? oh wait, or are you saying if the client does not bite on the 'human life value' you're having them sign off that they were offered this but declined it for the lowest possible? If that's the case I get it..Add your comment