by MaxHerr » Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:07 pm
If you have been sold a retirement plan by any agent or other person only to discover that what you really have is a form of life insurance, please contact me!!
Various websites, insurance agents, even insurance sales organizations and companies, have dramatically increased the amount of advertising and solicitations of life insurance disguised as a TAX-FEE RETIREMENT PLAN, such as a "Roth IRA on Steroids" or as an "INFINITE BANKING" (or "BANK ON YOURSELF") scheme. Were you shown an illustration leading you to believe you could have a multi-million dollar tax-free retirement fund for only a few hundred to a few thousand dollars per month?
These schemes are FRAUDULENT, and misrepresent life insurance as a "TAX-FREE RETIREMENT PLAN" . . . better than your 401(k), 403(b), IRA, or even your Roth IRA. Please don't fall for their slick presentations! The sale of life insurance as anything else is a violation of state insurance laws.
But if you have already become involved in something like this, there is help available. You may be entitled to recission of your contract, and full restitution of all premiums paid.
Several class action lawsuits are being prepared for litigation in various state and federal courts against major insurance companies, agencies, and agents. If you have been abused by an agent, insurance company or agency, or a "financial adviser" in this manner, please contact me. We will investigate your situation and find you legal representation.
Various websites, insurance agents, even insurance sales organizations and companies, have dramatically increased the amount of advertising and solicitations of life insurance disguised as a TAX-FEE RETIREMENT PLAN, such as a "Roth IRA on Steroids" or as an "INFINITE BANKING" (or "BANK ON YOURSELF") scheme. Were you shown an illustration leading you to believe you could have a multi-million dollar tax-free retirement fund for only a few hundred to a few thousand dollars per month?
These schemes are FRAUDULENT, and misrepresent life insurance as a "TAX-FREE RETIREMENT PLAN" . . . better than your 401(k), 403(b), IRA, or even your Roth IRA. Please don't fall for their slick presentations! The sale of life insurance as anything else is a violation of state insurance laws.
But if you have already become involved in something like this, there is help available. You may be entitled to recission of your contract, and full restitution of all premiums paid.
Several class action lawsuits are being prepared for litigation in various state and federal courts against major insurance companies, agencies, and agents. If you have been abused by an agent, insurance company or agency, or a "financial adviser" in this manner, please contact me. We will investigate your situation and find you legal representation.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:53 am Post Subject:
By the way, Mark, I applaud you for standing up publicly for your employee/solicitor.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 04:36 pm Post Subject:
Guest,
Trust me on something: From now on, whenever you post an opinion, do not end your "name" with the letters DMF. It does work well for you at all.
Regardless, it doesn't matter who I am.
This is a bit of a cop out, and if I was a psychologist I'd have you give me a call. This is a public forum and your opinion, whether educated or not, is important - to everyone. I do recall chatting with you and am at least somewhat confident you know what you're talking about. I've previously explained my position on why I think sticking with the "Guest" label is a bit drastic and will certainly lead to many more conversations just like this one. If you'd like to be taken seriously on this site, I truly hope you realize that at some point you'll need to introduce yourself.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 05:40 pm Post Subject:
I'm going to start a new thread where we can discuss the difference between solicitation and whistle-blowing.
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 06:27 pm Post Subject:
If Max allowed solicitations from others
I don't prevent anyone from doing so. But there is a proper way to post per the TOUs -- one of which is to not put links to commercial websites in the body of a post. As a moderator, I simply look for spam and duplicate posts and violations of the TOU in order to help maintain the quality of the site. InsTeacher does the same, as did all of the other moderators who preceded me. Unfortunately, most of the rest of the moderators seem to have fallen by the wayside, which is why I volunteered to be a moderator (and I am only a moderator on the Life and Auto forums) -- because there was a period when the website was being inundated with spam posts. That conduct has fallen off dramatically.
When you post as a "guest" it is no different than when I post as a "member". I am not posting as a "moderator", that is simply the title that appears in my moniker, and not by my choice. I did not set it up that way, that is the simply the way the website is designed.
If you were posting as a member, by now you would be listed as a "Forum Expert" based on the number of posts you have. Does that make you an expert? I don't know. But you certainly have an advanced level of knowledge. And your cop out about not revealing your identity is peculiar. There are plenty of others here who are confident enough to tell the world who they are. And if you're worried about committing a FINRA rule violation, most B/Ds now have monitoring services that search these kinds of blogs and have implemented protocols that permit their RRs to post within certain limitations and/or with prior approvals.
If you want to call the initial post that started this thread a "solicitation", I really don't object -- most of your challenges are simply wordplay anyway. But I don't view it as a solicitation. People need to know that there are licensed insurance professionals who are available to help them resolve the challenges they are experiencing with insurance companies. You might not realize it, but for the past 2-1/2 years I've been a contributor here, I have assisted countless persons to obtain settlements or other claims resolutions from their insurance companies without having to resort to attorneys and without any compensation to me. In one instance, I even helped an attorney obtain a small death benefit for his client simply by explaining to him how to word a letter to the insurance company on her behalf. He let me know several months later that his client subsequently received a check for $10,000.
And I get emails from all sorts of persons who are seeking information about how to get licensed as an insurance producer, whether their conduct in the past would be an obstacle to licensing, or how to even go about building a business in our industry. I get questions from people whose neighbor's trees have damaged their property, or who have had fires and need to know how to get their claims paid without much hassle. That all happens because I willingly provide them the opportunity to correspond with me.
The attorneys who now compensate me for providing my expertise are happy to do so. And I have to thank Mark Colbert for assisting me to begin focusing my energies in this new direction at this stage of my career, which extends back to my original licensing as a Life Agent in November 1980.
Mark Colbert and I began corresponding with one another more than a year ago, when he simply asked for my independent insights into a case he was working on. Apparently, I impressed him enough with my knowledge, experience, and integrity, that he asked for my opinions on a few other cases, and has now asked me to join in his work on a number of other cases in several states.
Because of the work I am now doing in this regard, I have, for all intents and purposes, stopped marketing insurance products. Not that I can't, but because it would represent a conflict of interest in most circumstances as I work with the clients we have. So I don't. But it's also important to me to maintain my licenses in active status with the CDI.
The insurance consuming public is generally unaware of how to effectively resolve matters with insurance companies, and when matters go beyond the point of resolution and need to go to litigation, they don't know where or to whom they may turn for advice or assistance. I'm sure you recognize this, because we see their posts here on a regular basis. [On the other hand, the attorneys flood the TV commercial breaks with their "have you been injured" and "don't let the insurance companies take advantage of you, you need an attorney" advertisements. It may ultimately be necessary to retain legal counsel, but not the day of the accident, the next day, or even the next week or month following the loss.
You have previously agreed that marketing life insurance for any other need other than to leave money behind for individual or estate planning uses is generally contrary to the fundamental purpose of life insurance. What are you actively doing to stop this sort of marketing that borders so closely on fraudulent misrepresentation that it is no longer funny?
Most people, as I did in 2009, stumble onto this website by accident in their search for information. If this is the one thing that they are seeking information about, at least they will be able to find it here. There is no money involved. These folks have already been abused in that regard, and I don't intend to harm them to a greater extent.
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 04:54 pm Post Subject:
Max, thanks for admitting that your post was a solicitation.
We're on the same side.
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 07:23 pm Post Subject:
If you want to call the initial post that started this thread a "solicitation", I really don't object -- most of your challenges are simply wordplay anyway. But I don't view it as a solicitation
My lack of objection to your characterization is not the same as an admission of making a solicitation.
If "we're on the same side," my question to you is, "What will you do when you encounter someone who has been sold life insurance as a retirement plan?"
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 08:04 pm Post Subject:
Dear Anonymous guest,
Really? Are you serious?
If you want to call the initial post that started this thread a "solicitation", I really don't object -- most of your challenges are simply wordplay anyway. But I don't view it as a solicitation.
Please point to the portion of the above statement you're interpreting as an admission of solicitation. Initially, I thought you just had a hard-on for Max and were flexing your WFG muscles. Now, I'm really beginning to think you have a problem.
If you are a person who conducts business in an ethical and morally positive manner, you will disclose your identity and tell us all what qualifies you to question ANYTHING Max does for me - including the post in question.
I am licensed in the state of California as a Private Investigator who specializes in cases involving Life Insurance Fraud. Over the past 19 years, I have investigated cases in more than twenty states and at least four different countries.
I've investigated many agents in the past who've conducted business anonymously and have clearly failed operate in the insurance community's best interest. Because these people have elected to conduct business in an immoral and unethical manner, they must keep their identities hidden to avoid legal and financial retribution.
I do not like these people, but deep down, I owe them so much. Their dishonesty and failure to disclose who they are or how they do business has given me leverage to help make a difference in the industry. Bless their hearts, they've also made me a great deal of money.
Mr. Guest, I know you realize that what irritates me most about the way you conduct business is the fact that you hide in the shadows and point a seemingly crooked little finger at other professionals who are doing nothing more than attempting to help honest, hard-working policyholders who've been shafted by the agents I've outlined above. In the past, you've blamed your anonymity on regulatory policies and procedures.
Max and I recently handed a securities fraud case in New Jersey over to a FINRA investigator and are hoping they will help a young lady recover nearly $4 million left to her by her late husband. After he passed away from cancer, a dishonest agent swept in and restructured
everything her husband left to her. Do you know what it means when a woman says "My husband's money is gone and it's all I have. After I prayed about this problem, God sent me your name?"
It means I'll move heaven and earth to make a difference for her - because nobody else will. Fortunately, the agent is not hiding in the shadows so I'll at least get a chance to put him out of business.
From this point forward, whenever you post anonymously I want you to remember that honest agents don't hide in the shadows.
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 09:36 pm Post Subject: Life insurance
Hi Mark,
I agree with you that life insurance should not be sold under the guise of a tax free retirement plan, but do you think an indexed UL should be included in someone’s overall retirement plan?
I have analyzed all the products on the market and only one outperforms fixed income investments. Here are the reasons why:
1- Limited pay - seven years
2- No cap on earnings
3- 1% guarantee
4- 70 participation
5- No surrender charges
6- Increasing death benefit
7- Low cost of insurance
8- Returns not based on a single index
If any of the pieces of this puzzle change, the program does work.
As reputable insurance agents, we can't sell a policy where there is not a need. That said this program provides the needed life insurance when someone is working (the product only works for individuals under age 52) and the ability to withdrawal cash when and if needed to supplement their retirement. I calculated the actual returns of the program from 1990 to 2011. This time span shows the good years and the bad years. The program outperformed the S&P, five year CD's, every indexed annuity and the American Balanced Class A fund. I think it also provides piece of mind to younger people who may have concerns about the future costs of long term care.
Please keep in mind these are actual returns. Not some crystal ball assumptions. I would love to get your opinion. By the by, this is a great site. I'm glad I found it.
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 05:45 am Post Subject:
I have analyzed all the products on the market
I seriously doubt that statement. Even I cannot and do not make that claim. But I would be willing to bet my ability to analyze a UL policy far exceeds yours.
Limited pay - seven years
Are you saying there is an IUL product with a 1% interest guarantee that is fully paid up to age 120 after only seven years of premium payments? :lol: We'll likely meet one day in court.
I calculated the actual returns of the program from 1990 to 2011
This, sir, is an IMPOSSIBILITY because there was NOT ONE IUL product on the market in 1990.
Please keep in mind these are actual returns.
And the purpose of making that statement is to prove to a 20-year-old first-time insurance consumer that those returns are guaranteed for the next 100 years? Or to twist a 50-year-old out of a perfectly good WL (or maybe even a well-funded UL) policy by representing that those very same returns will carry forward for the next 70 years?
I hope you realize that fraudulent misrepresentation such as this is a crime, and as such, your E&O coverage will not (1) cover the loss, and (2) provide you with a defense.
Low cost of insurance
And how long do you believe this remains an accurate statement? I just put the finishing touches on an analysis of an IUL policy for a 30-year-old firefighter rated preferred, whose guaranteed "low" COI per $1,000 per month increased by only 589,661.71% from age 30 ($0.01413) to age 120 ($83.33333).
Please take the time to email me the specifics on this "program" -- a complete illustration for any standard-rated person 25-50 years of age will do -- and I'll be happy to show you the error(s) of your ways. Or not, and when one of your clients decides to sue you and the one insurance company (whose product is the only one that does all of this, and more) you represent for fraudulent misrepresentation, I'll be happy to represent them as an expert witness.
Posted: Tue May 01, 2012 06:12 am Post Subject:
whose guaranteed "low" COI per $1,000 per month increased by only 589,661.71% from age 30 ($0.01413) to age 120 ($83.33333).
Yes, I am aware that there is a difference between "guaranteed" COI and "current" COI, but that's not the point. You wanted to talk about the "low cost of insurance", and in all forms of Universal Life, the "low cost" only exists on Day 1. It inevitably goes up from there because the contract is designed around Annual Term rates, which, inherently increase with age.
There is only one guarantee when it comes to COI -- and that's shown in the columns that inevitably reveal the policy lapsing without value at some point in the future, based on guaranteed rates and guaranteed interest. Could be 8-10 years down the road, could be 47 years down the road. But, somewhere down the road, nevertheless, the policy will lapse. Especially if premiums less than the FULL non-MEC premiums are only paid in years 1-7 of any UL policy (and even the full 7-pay non-MEC premium is unlikely to guarantee a policy will make it to age 120)
How that magic number "7" ever came about, I do not know, other than when I first came into the business in 1980, seven years was the average longevity of a WL policy in America, so it was sort of a valid statement for an agent to say, "Mr. Jones, if you're like our average customer, after seven years, you won't have to pay another premium to our company." Of course he wouldn't, because he would have lapsed or exchanged the policy.
And that's absolutely true whether we're talking about "guaranteed" COI or "current" COI, which those of us who have been around for a while know, without a doubt, will increase with mortality over time. The rapid acceleration begins somewhere around age 50.
Besides, no one outside the insurance company ever knows exactly what the "current" COI in a UL / IUL / VUL policy is at the time it is being assessed.
And, yes, I know about the secondary no-lapse guarantees. But I've never seen one that does not fail at some point in time in the future after a person stops paying the premiums.
Add your comment