by Insurance Expert » Thu Jul 30, 2009 03:54 am
There have been quite a few posts with this subject.
Many people have been saying that if there is not a named beneficiary, the proceeds get paid to the estate.
I chimed in and said that a policy could have a default beneficiary. I also said that I thought that most policies don't have a default beneficiary.
Anyway, I sold two policies today from two different companies and both of them on the application said what would happen to the money if no beneficiary was alive. In neither case would the money go directly to the estate.
Many people have been saying that if there is not a named beneficiary, the proceeds get paid to the estate.
I chimed in and said that a policy could have a default beneficiary. I also said that I thought that most policies don't have a default beneficiary.
Anyway, I sold two policies today from two different companies and both of them on the application said what would happen to the money if no beneficiary was alive. In neither case would the money go directly to the estate.
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:28 am Post Subject:
This thread was started precisely because I realized that I had made a mistake when I claimed that most policies don't have default (preference) beneficiaries. I make mistakes and have no problem owning up to them. Some policies have them. Some don't. From having started to pay attention to this subject, it appears as if the majority of policies do have them.
Everyone is in agreement that proper beneficiary titles are important.
Read the court case again and you'll see that the problem wasn't caused solely from not having proper beneficiary designations. It was caused because it was a group policy and they couldn't determine which plan was in effect. There is something else that you should notice about the court case. There is no named beneficiary, and despite your claims, it is not in probate court. It is in district court. The only way that this will end up in probate court is if the district court determines that the policy in effect was the one with the estate as the default beneficiary.
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:58 am Post Subject:
The point made in this thread is simply that default beneficiaries exist so that it is incorrect to keep stating (over and over and over) that if a beneficiary is not named the policy will automatically be paid to the estate.
This is only true if no default beneficiary exists or the default beneficiary is the estate.
Gary for you to think that the owner and the insured are almost always the same person simply shows that you don't do business in the high net worth market or the corporate market. Regardless, the fact that the owner is the first default beneficiary is further proof that Florida law doesn't forbid default beneficiaries.
It doesn't matter if it usually will be paid to the estate in this situation since they are the same person. The key from a legal perspective is that it won't always be paid to the estate because it won't always be the same person. It won't always be paid to the estate because Florida doesn't have a law forbidding preference beneficiaries. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
My friend, Gary, is from the Show Me state. Show him a law forbidding preference beneficiaries.
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:59 am Post Subject:
To keep this very simple:
1)Many policies have preference beneficiaries.
2)This includes individual policies in the state of Florida.
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:59 am Post Subject:
I.E. how many times are you going to say the same convoluted thing?
No beneficiary designations will result in the life insurance proceeds being paid to the estate of the owner/insured.
It's that's simple.
Now if you want to qualify that or make a pointless point that in some very small circumstances that's not the case.....you go ahead and hang onto your pointless point.
This whole thread is pointless and to try to hammer your pointless point home that if beneficiary designations are left blank things will maybe "sometimes" be OKAY is insurance malpractice.
But please post again....I get a good laugh reading your posts with my morning coffee.
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 01:09 pm Post Subject:
Wait a sec...here you go back pedaling again...
No beneficiary designations will result in the life insurance proceeds being paid to the estate of the owner/insured
and you've throughout this thread used terms like ALWAYS, EVERY TIME, etc...noooooooowww, you throw inNow if you want to qualify that or make a pointless point that in some very small circumstances that's not the case.....you go ahead and hang onto your pointless point.
First of all I looked at the seven life insurance policys that are in my possession (me, husband, son, daughter, and three grandkids), they ALL have preference beneficiarys, they are all privately purchased policys. I think IE said the last two out of three had this claus..so I would in no way call that 'very small circumstances'...What the problem is Gary is that once again you have made a blanket statement (ie always, every time blah blah blah), and cannot for the life of yourself admit that you just might be wrong... :roll: or actually made a mistake...it's ok Gary we all make them...as I told my son when he was growing up...''put on your big boy pants, suck it up, admit you made a mistake, THAT is what a MAN would do'...good advise here as well...This whole thread is pointless and to try to hammer your pointless point home that if beneficiary designations are left blank things will maybe "sometimes" be OKAY is insurance malpractice.
Where did ANYONE say this? hmmmmm ? Where? this hasn't been said...ALL that's been said is 'if' there is a default/preference bene. claus, it will follow that claus..period..NO ONE said what you are quoting...NO ONE...ONLY YOU....There is no malpractice, anywhere with the possible exception of your know it all attitude, contrary to proof that you don't! Your statement that policys without a named beneficiary, with a preference claus will automatically go to the estate, is the ONLY incorrect, uninformed, erroneous, convoluted statements in this thread Gary have come from you...which of course you know and once pointed out you skirt around it 'kind of'...with little statements like the one above... :roll: sad, truely sad.Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 02:45 pm Post Subject:
No beneficiary designations will result in the life insurance proceeds being paid to the estate of the owner/insured.
It's that's simple.
You are very close to being correct. The problem is that you are missing a gigantic point. That gigantic point is that a Preference beneficiary is a beneficiary designation. Therefore, even if there isn't a named beneficiary that is alive, there is still a beneficiary designation as long as there is a preference beneficiary. The state in question will have approved this contract language making the use of a preference beneficiary legal. You have a refusal to look at a Florida contract, but look and you'll see that I'm correct.
Stop saying that it will be paid to the estate. A living owner has no estate. There is nothing uncommon about this.
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 02:52 pm Post Subject:
Now if you want to qualify that or make a pointless point that in some very small circumstances that's not the case.....you go ahead and hang onto your pointless point.
This whole thread is pointless and to try to hammer your pointless point home that if beneficiary designations are left blank things will maybe "sometimes" be OKAY is insurance malpractice.
The only point to my original post in this thread was to point out that I made a mistake. It was a mistake when I said that policies don't usually have a preference beneficiary. The reality is that they usually do.
Nobody has claimed that it's ok to leave a beneficiary designation blank. We are all in agreement that this is a very dangerous thing.
This has morphed into 6 pages because you have claimed that preference beneficiaries can never be used in the state of Florida. It doesn't matter if this is the case often or just on rare occasions. Either way, it shows that your assertion that the benefit will always be paid to the estate is wrong.
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:27 pm Post Subject:
Well, I'm laughing out loud....still.
It doesn't matter how many times both of you type and post your non-sense.
NO BENEFICIARY DESIGNATIONS WILL RESULT IN THE PROCEEDS BEING TIED UP IN PROBATE COURT.
THAT my anonymouse friends is what "happens."
Your "opinions" notwithstanding the facts.
Expert: Scott R. Graves - 6/19/2007
Question
What happens when a Life Insurance Policy has No beneficiary? I know it goes "to the estate"...but what does it all mean?
Answer
Generally, when a life insurance policy does not have a beneficiary, then the named beneficiary has proceeded the insured in death. None of the insurance companies will issue a policy without, at least, a beneficiary. Many policies have 'Contingent Beneficiaries', meaning, a named person that will receive the proceeds of the policy in case the 'Primary Beneficiary' has died. If neither beneficiary is living, then, yes, the proceeds do go 'into the estate'.
What this means is that the funds become an asset, just as all the other property of the deceased are assets. The assets then are reviewed and dispersed to the creditors of the deceased at Probate. Probate means that the court will have hearings. At these hearings, the judge will choose an executor of the estate (usually a family member or family attorney) if there is no will stating who the deceased wants to be the executor. The executor will be the representative that is responsible for carrying out the orders of the court. This person is responsible for managing the assets of the estate and makes sure all the bills, left by the deceased, get paid. The judge will hear from all the creditors and order the executor to disperse funds to pay debts left by the deceased owner and creditee. If there is not sufficient liquid funds (cash) available to satisfy the creditors, then the judge will order the executor to sell assets to create cash to pay the bills. The executor, the attorney, and the court also have to be paid from these assets. Once the creditor part of the estate has been settled, and there are any assets left, then (once again if there is no will) it is the judges responsibility to choose someone to receive these remaining assets. Now, if there are minor children, the judge will also choose a Guardian to finish raising the children. Depending on the size of the estate, this could take a few months or it could take a couple of years.
I hope this will answer your question, and thank you for using Allexperts.com.
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 05:01 pm Post Subject:
Gary, since all caps bolded letters aren't working, maybe you should try a bigger font.
The only way for you to be correct is if preference beneficiaries were illegal in the state of Florida. You have already been proven wrong. All that you need to do is to look at the contracts that the state has approved. Of course, you won't do this since you aren't capable of seeing anything that disagrees with you.
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 08:11 pm Post Subject:
Gary, since all caps bolded letters aren't working, maybe you should try a bigger font.
oh my gosh! what a GREAT ideaAdd your comment