Senior Healthcare Consultants: How safe are they for agents?

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 04:42 am Post Subject:

Thank you for your responses.

1) No. Your math simply doesn't add up. By your statement, you were averaging a recruitment of five agents a week for the last five years, which would return 1300 agents (5 agents x 52 weeks x 5 years). In my experience in 2009, you were actually recruiting ten to twelve agents a week, and you were stepping up the pace at that time. You issue agent numbers sequentially, and my number was well over 2000.

Assuming an actual 2500 agents and assuming 150 current career agents (which is likely also an overstatement, you're probably throwing in your part-timers as well to save face), and recognizing that more than half of this number represent new agents from personal experience (as they haven't seen the scam yet), I would put total turnover at somewhere between 95 and 98 percent, not the 85 to 88 percent turnover you claim. And yes, by any measure, that's deplorable, and points to milking agents for their setup fees.

This was a simple question that required a simple answer, and you dodged the actual question and lied about the rest. Par for the course.

2) You blew this one too. I have several applications still in my files that had come from leads generated by "the system" and were actually current Senior Healthcare Consultants clients. You're right - churning or twisting business makes no business sense, unless you factor in replacing business as a method to burn out an agent and force him or her into debt. And, as we've seen, that's what the SHC business model is all about. Thanks for proving my point.

I normally hate the regulation that mandates that I keep paper records for years under lock and key, but sometimes it actually comes in handy.

3) IRS Form SS-8 isn't a problem for most agencies because they do due diligence and recognize that training cannot be mandatory or a condition of employment for a 1099 employee. You didn't. Having dealt with the IRS before, I can tell you folks this: They really don't have a sense of humor. Good luck with that.

4) I was there in the daily mandatory meetings last year and personally heard and saw managers telling agents to tell seniors that all Medicare PFFS and PPO plans were abolished as of January 1, 2010. Plenty of other agents can and will testify to this. So, it wasn't just agents who were lied to on this count. Seniors were misrepresented under the explicit direction of SHC management. The next time you debate this one will probably be with the powers that be at CMS.

5) I am actually surprised you owned up to this one. Laudable, but too late. You misrepresented yourself to thousands of seniors on this count too. For the record, and for everyone keeping score here, you have not been A+ rated by the Better Business Bureau since at least the summer of 2009. That's an inexcusable lapse. I am sure the BBB, CMS and TDI will not be amused.

6) How can you assert that Mr. Dale took full responsibility for his actions if the ongoing violations at SHC are substantially the same ones for which he was penalized by the Texas Department of Insurance in 2004-2007? Twisting, misrepresenting seniors - it's still going on, some of it even by your own admission.

7) How do you people live with yourselves?

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 08:24 am Post Subject:

Shcmanager

All of the below questions refer to the 2009 fiscal year.

1. What is your name and position within SHC?

2. What are SHCs costs in performing an initial training session?

3. What was the total income from initial training sessions?

4. How many appointments were issued?

5. How many appointments resulted in a sale?

6. What was the total income based on sales?

7. How much was paid out in commissions?

8. How many new agents were trained?

9. In a previous post you stated there were roughly 150 active agents. What is the actual number?

Thank you

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 03:53 pm Post Subject:

I don't think it's any of our business to know who shcmanager is just as it's not their business to know who we are until this goes to the legal system. We have plenty of evidence against SHC without resorting to personal or ad hominem attacks.

Some of the financial information isn't our business either, and in any event, they can make up numbers as they see fit for PR purposes (as they apparently have already in this thread). Although shcmanager is writing with apparent authority to represent his company, his postings are not sworn statements and are not subject to perjury. We won't get a handle on the extent of the fraud and misrepresentation until SHC's actual financial records are subpoenaed and reviewed by the relevant authorities. Until then, however ridiculous their advertising and recruiting claims like "12 hours a day, $1600 a week" are to people who have been through the scam and know better, it's going to have to wait.

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 08:47 pm Post Subject: SHC

I am very happy that I found this thread as I was about to email a contact on careerbuilder today about becoming a rep. I am very curious to know why seasoned reps that are already licensed must pay more than newcomers?

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 08:59 pm Post Subject: Re: Jelax

SHC's justification is that licensed agents have a poorer success rate in SHC's system than agents with no prior insurance experience. This is the reverse of what you'd expect, but there you are.

The point has been made that the failure rate for both new and seasoned agents at SHC is extremely high even compared to other 100 percent commission jobs. We're still trying to get a handle on just how bad turnover is for non-broker agents at SHC.

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 09:54 pm Post Subject: Not For Me

Received a call from some gal at SHC; the attitude in her voice alone was enough for me to say to myself "forget it". Her voice actually trailed off at the end of her phone message and she hung up before it was done.

All the negative stuff I've been reading on so many websites just seals it.

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:40 pm Post Subject: Response to Wrong Again

In regards to being in business for themselves. Do we vigilantly keep up with our sales force by accounting for their actions, requiring reports, etc.? Absolutely. Regarding your assertion that SHC salespeople are employees vs. independent contractors, per the IRS, the following is literally copy/pasted directly from IRS Publication 15-A:

“To determine whether a salesperson is an employee for social security, Medicare, and FUTA tax purposes, the salesperson must meet all eight elements of the statutory employee test. A salesperson is a statutory employee for social security, Medicare, and FUTA tax purposes if he or she:
1. Works full time for one person or company except, possibly, for sideline sales activities on behalf of some other person,
2. Sells on behalf of, and turns his or her orders over to, the person or company for which he or she works,
3. Sells to wholesalers, retailers, contractors, or operators of hotels, restaurants, or similar establishments,
4. Sells merchandise for resale, or supplies for use in the customer’s business,
5. Agrees to do substantially all of this work personally,
6. Has no substantial investment in the facilities used to do the work, other than in facilities for transportation,
7. Maintains a continuing relationship with the person or company for which he or she works, and
8. Is not an employee under common-law rules.”

Further, under common law rules, the following is stated:
The extent to which the worker has unreimbursed business expenses.
Independent contractors are more likely to have unreimbursed expenses than are employees.
The extent of the worker’s investment.
An independent contractor often has a significant investment in the facilities he or she uses in performing services for someone else. However, a significant investment is not necessary for independent contractor status.
How the business pays the worker.
An employee is generally guaranteed a regular wage amount for an hourly, weekly, or other period of time. This usually indicates that a worker is an employee, even when the wage or salary is supplemented by a commission. An independent contractor is usually paid by a flat fee for the job. However, it is common in some professions, such as law, to pay independent contractors hourly.
The extent to which the worker can realize a profit or loss. An independent contractor can make a profit or loss.
Type of relationship. Facts that show the parties’ type of relationship include:
•Written contracts describing the relationship the parties intended to create. – Everyone who comes on staff with SHC acknowledges the relationship the parties intend to create. Specifically those agents are independent contractors.
•Whether or not the business provides the worker with employee-type benefits, such as insurance, a pension plan, vacation pay, or sick pay.

In summation, obviously (as is the case in most 100% commission insurance sales organizations) our agents are not employees per the definition of the law.

On high Turn-over - I am not sure what you are basing your opinion on here but it is not factual as far as I can tell. There is no indication that SHC’s turnover is any greater or less than like companies. We do everything we can think of to help people to become successful. Again, I appreciate your opinion; however, it is not factual or accurate.

System designed to exhaust? If our system was built to exhaust others and throw people away we would not be continuing to grow as an organization like we are. We are the number one producer for our primary carrier and are growing at a modest but steady pace. That is through hard work and retention of agents, not the other way around. Your accusations are baseless and without merit but again I will respect your right to voice them.

Regarding the example given in my last reposne: Again you’re misguided – you seem to be speculating and forming an opinion that is void of any basis of truth. You have no clue what is paid for or not paid by SHC there is no exaggeration of the amount SHC pays to offer each agent this opportunity when factoring in the recruiting and overhead costs associated with running this organization. If you look at everything that we provide a trainee, every aspect of what you are mentioning is discussed MULTIPLE times throughout the process and before anyone steps foot out into the field. Many who start with us take advantage of the bonuses that are offered to offset the costs that you mention and many are very successful applying our training and system. They are successful because they work hard, they care about the seniors they meet with and they continually do the right thing for them, and they follow the proven successful system SHC employs. That is how we all provide for our families.

One more time as this issue has already been addressed. Any efforts to cause agents to quit are entirely counterproductive for us as an organization.


If you lived it you would know is what you state: If you lived it, you would know that what you are saying is inaccurate. I would assume that others that have tried and failed may share your views but that is human nature. It can never be their fault and the more people you can get to think as you do the better it substantiates the failure.

I am truly sorry this did not work out for you but your points are inaccurate at best and malicious at worst. We are hardworking people providing for our families just like you are and I can assure you that is not happening due to an agent that joins this organization and fails, that is ridiculous to even consider and 180 degrees from the truth.

Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:02 am Post Subject: SHC Information

Here is some additional background information on SHC.


Go to: www shcpr.info / feb2010 .asp

Don't know if it will help!

Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 03:53 am Post Subject:

All I can say is that SHC Managers will find out what it is like to work hard and support their families when they are all working for someone else because SHC will be shut down.

Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 02:56 pm Post Subject: Response to scammed

There are actually people in this company who are not involved in day to day management "conspiracy", both in the field and out, who have stuck with this company for years and continue to build their business and continue to produce, so once again not a scam... By the way, the quote on the prior post referring to the costs of doing business did not come from SHC. It was from a blogger on this very site (page 5) who went through the interview process. Again; here is the quote:

I can't believe people are so bitter here.

I have recently gone through the interviews with this company, and to be fair I have seen nothing held back.

Are they going to make themselves look bad? No of course not. But in all fairness they lay out everything to you.

Every bit of information conveyed here in complaints has been explained fully to me by recruiters. SHC explains what you could pay for in the beginning, the 18 dollars per preset appointment is not a surprise at the last minute. If anyone with half a brain searches the website and reviews the information (like SHC requests you do) they will know all this information.

To be honest anyone who gets all the way to Dallas, THEN decides they don't like all these fees is an idiot. If the company isn't for you, don't go for it. There may be better out there, but by no means is this a scam.”