Potential legal liabilities exist for advisors that withhold information about settlements The Supreme Court case of Grigbsy v. Russell (1911) established a life insurance policy owner’s right to transfer or convert the use of an insurance policy. This ruling placed the ownership rights in a life insurance policy on the same legal footing as more traditional property such as real estate, stocks and bonds. As with these other types of personal property, a life insurance policy is an asset and can be converted to another use, can be used as collateral, or the ownership can be transferred at the discretion of the policy owner.
Advisors should be aware of legal action that policy owners have brought against carriers and advisors for failing to disclose the life settlement option.
➢ In 2011, the owners of a life insurance policy filed a lawsuit against John Hancock for violating Washington State’s Consumer Protection Act. The court denied John Hancock’s appeal for summary judgement that the policy owner should have already known about the secondary market on their own, and Hancock was forced to settle prior to trial. Graham-Bingham Irrevocable Trust v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co. USA, 827 F. Supp. 2d 1275, 1287 (W.D. Wash. 2011) ➢ In 2014, the owners of a life insurance policy filed a putative class action lawsuit against their insurance company and advisor in a state that doesn’t even have the disclosure mandate. The policy owner’s suit cited the “common and systemic practice” of “failing to inform and/or concealing from its insureds the option of a life settlement in connection with their life insurance policies.” And, the suit sought damages based on the defendant “purposely omiting this information because it knows that other options, such as surrendering the policy (in whole or in part) or letting it lapse, will generate greater profits to the insurance company than a life settlement would.” This suit was settled out of court in the summer of 2016. Grill v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co., Case No. 14cv-00051 (C.D. Cal.) [Third Amended Complaint] ➢ In 2016, a similar suit was filed by the owners of a life insurance policy with claims against the defendant that they are engaged in a “pervasive practice in the life insurance industry,” and that the defendant “instructs its own agents as well as independent agents that transact insurance to omit or conceal the option of a life settlement from its insureds.” The claim seeks compensatory, punitive, and treble damages and cites violations of California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, financial abuse of an elder, and unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business practices. Joseph v. Kaye, et al., Case No. SC125276 (Cal. Super. Ct.)
Because a life insurance policy is legally recognized as personal property of the owner, withholding information about secondary market options from a policy owner can open the risk of possible legal liability for any advisor. As precedent setting legal actions mount across the county in the matter of disclosure vs concealment of information about the secondary market value of life insurance policies, more and more advisors are adding this information to their practice as both a smart business offering, and as a hedge against potential legal and financial liability.
LCX Life: LCX Life is the only Life Settlement Marketing Organization (LSMO) in the insurance industry. Our mission is to work with agents, advisors, and our IMO/BGA partners to build a network of Appointed Referral Agents who are educated and supported to offer the life settlement option to policy owners contemplating lapse or surrender. We also work with independent agents, financial advisors, lawyers, accountants, and long-term care industry service providers. With LCX Life, we can rescue thousands of policies every year, and in the process, deliver a recurring revenue stream to your organization. www.lcxlife.com