69 Percent of Single Parents Lack Life Insurance

           69 percent of single parents Lack Life Insurance

Obtaining life insurance is a huge challenge for 69 percent of single parents, according to a new study conducted by Genworth Financial. The study found that unmarried parents, especially those with children living in the home full-time, are the largest group of people without life coverage.

Single Parents Struggle to Buy Coverage

Parents who are unmarried or divorced struggle the most to secure life insurance for their families. According to the survey, in addition to the high number of single parents struggling to buy coverage with children in the home full-time, 59 percent of single parents with children in and out of the house are without life insurance.

This is compared to 45 percent of married parents with children in the home that carry coverage and 49 percent of the entire U.S. adult population that covers some type of life insurance coverage.

The survey found that the number of uninsured households tends to increase as the number of children increases. This is especially true for single parents earning lower incomes. For families with five or more children, the likelihood of being uninsured drastically increases.

Securing Coverage Harder for Unmarried Male Parents

Genworth Financial found that of those surveyed, 79 percent of unmarried men who are not homeowners, have children in the household earning up to $250,000 per year are without a life insurance policy. This is compared with 66 percent of women who earn less than $50,000 per year.

The reason that many men, and single parents as a whole, don’t secure coverage is because they are too busy and sometimes too afraid to make the purchase. Also, some say many individuals are not educated enough about life insurance and therefore, lack the confidence to buy their own.

If you are interested in getting insured but feel uneducated in this area, start by learning the difference betweenterm and permanent life insurance. By understanding these types of coverages, you could determine which route is best for you then start shopping for companies that meet your needs at an affordable price.

69 Percent of Single Parents Lack Life Insurance

           69 percent of single parents Lack Life Insurance

Obtaining life insurance is a huge challenge for 69 percent of single parents, according to a new study conducted by Genworth Financial. The study found that unmarried parents, especially those with children living in the home full-time, are the largest group of people without life coverage.

Single Parents Struggle to Buy Coverage

Parents who are unmarried or divorced struggle the most to secure life insurance for their families. According to the survey, in addition to the high number of single parents struggling to buy coverage with children in the home full-time, 59 percent of single parents with children in and out of the house are without life insurance.

This is compared to 45 percent of married parents with children in the home that carry coverage and 49 percent of the entire U.S. adult population that covers some type of life insurance coverage.

The survey found that the number of uninsured households tends to increase as the number of children increases. This is especially true for single parents earning lower incomes. For families with five or more children, the likelihood of being uninsured drastically increases.

Securing Coverage Harder for Unmarried Male Parents

Genworth Financial found that of those surveyed, 79 percent of unmarried men who are not homeowners, have children in the household earning up to $250,000 per year are without a life insurance policy. This is compared with 66 percent of women who earn less than $50,000 per year.

The reason that many men, and single parents as a whole, don’t secure coverage is because they are too busy and sometimes too afraid to make the purchase. Also, some say many individuals are not educated enough about life insurance and therefore, lack the confidence to buy their own.

If you are interested in getting insured but feel uneducated in this area, start by learning the difference betweenterm and permanent life insurance. By understanding these types of coverages, you could determine which route is best for you then start shopping for companies that meet your needs at an affordable price.

22 States Reach Life Insurance Agreement with Boston Insurer

         22 States Reach Life Insurance Agreement with Boston Insurer

John Hancock Life Insurance Co. has reached an agreement with nearly two dozen states to settle a dispute over how the Boston insurer pays life insurance policies and annuities. The move comes after 35 states and the District of Columbia audited the company, alleging that it abuses its policies and contracts, not paying properly after a person dies.

John Hancock Mismanaged Beneficiary Funds

The insurance company is required under its contracts to properly pay beneficiaries after a policyholder dies. If the insurance company cannot find the beneficiaries, states like California have an unclaimed property program that has businesses send lost or abandoned financial accounts to after three years of inactivity to safeguard them from being spent or lost.

According to reports, the company didn’t send beneficiaries money and didn’t shift the funds to the unclaimed property program.

In one case, John Hancock reportedly used the cash value of a life insurance policy to pay an individual’s premium over a seven-year period. The person died in 1999, yet the beneficiaries never were sent any payments and benefits were never sent to the controller’s office.

Company Vows to Improve Claims Practices

To settle the dispute, Jonathan Chiel, executive vice president and general counsel for John Hancock, says the company will now improve its claims practices.

Under the agreement, the company is now required to do a better job of identifying deceased policyholders and also notifying their family that they have money waiting for them. In California alone, the values of more than 6,400 accounts dating back to 1992 will be restored.

According to the California controller’s office, John Hancock was one of many insurance companies audited. It was just the first to be held accountable for its actions.

The other states involved in the settlement were Kentucky, Texas, Georgia, Idaho, Oregon, Illinois, New Jersey, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Maryland, South Dakota, Michigan, Utah, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia.

Texas Seeks Oversight of Life Settlements

                Texas seeks Oversight of life Settlements

Securities regulators in Texas are pushing for greater state oversight of the life settlement industry. This push comes after regulators began their effort to shut down at least six companies that buy these policies from seniors.

Investors Losing Money by the Millions

Individuals who have invested money into life settlements, (life insurance policies companies purchase from senior citizen policyholders based on their life expectancies in an effort to become their beneficiaries and collect the full sum of their payout upon their deaths) are losing it by the millions, according to the Texas State Securities Board.

Those offering to set up settlement opportunities for retirees are advertising returns of 20 percent or more per year so that they will invest millions into their policies, regulators say. The more money placed into the policies, the larger the amount of cash payout is promised to retirees when the policy is settled.

Unfortunately, Texas regulators say that despite 2,200 retirees putting $220 million into policies over the past two years for life settlement cash outs, many have lost some or all of their money. This is largely due to underestimated life expectancies and other issues.

Regulators Seek Oversight of the Settlement Industry

A major lack of meaningful oversight is said to be blamed for retirees being taken advantage of by the companies that have yet to be named. It’s for this reason that the state is looking for the ability to govern the industry like other states that officially recognized life settlements as investments subject to regulation.

State Insurance Commissioner Mike Geeslin has urged lawmakers to consider tighter regulation of the business, noting in a statement that “Even though the settlement industry is relatively young, it has produced a substantial amount of harm to Texas investors.”

The only problem for regulators is that there is less than one month left in the regular session of the Legislature and, so far, no legislation has been introduced in either of the state’s legislative chambers. With little time to spare, the likelihood of regulators gaining control of the industry soon is very slim.

Should I Get Term or Permanent Life Insurance?

                  should i get Term or permanent life Insurance?

Deciding what type of life insurance to purchase can be challenging to those who want to make sure they buy the very best coverage for their family. The two main types of coverage to purchase are term and permanent. Which is the best choice for you? Since making the right choice depends on your circumstances, let’s take a closer look at how you might decide.

The Difference between Term and Permanent Insurance

First let’s take a look the two types of coverage. Term life insurance is a predetermined sum of money people pay to cover their death if occurs during the specified period of time. For instance, if you buy a 10-year term policy, the payments you make cover you as long as you died within the next 10 years.

While you may be able to purchase additional life insurance riders like Accidental Death or the Disability Waiver of Premium, the term policy in and of itself typically doesn’t come with additional benefits. At the end of a term policy, it is necessary to purchase another one to be covered.

Permanent life insurance is coverage meant to financially protect loved ones upon your death, no matter when you die. This means, if you purchase the coverage at the age of 30 and die at 85, as long as you keep up with payments, you will never have to purchase a new policy.

One element of permanent life coverage that makes it unique to the term policy is its savings component. Because you are likely to spend 30 or more years paying into permanent life insurance, making it more of an investment, the policy is treated as such.

Permanent premium payments go toward death benefits, investments (money market securities, bonds, mutual funds or even applied to a fixed interest rate) and cash payouts that can be used as money left over for your family upon your death, or even extra cash you take prior to your death.

There are three standard types of permanent coverage:

• Traditional Whole Life: Guarantees annual premiums, cash values and death benefits.
• Variable Life: Few premium and benefit guarantees but more potential for cash-value increases because investments are riskier.
• Universal Life: A flexible coverage option that allows premiums to vary from year to year.

It’s good to note that because permanent coverage offers so many more features than term coverage, it typically comes with a higher premium.

Deciding the Type of Coverage to Choose

To help you decide which type of coverage might work best for you, let’s look at life circumstances and desires that might sway your decision in one direction over the other.

(Click on the image for a larger version)Keep in mind that the above circumstances should not solely be used to decide whether term vs. permanent life insurance is best. Instead, it is meant to give you an idea of the type of coverage that might better suit your personal circumstance.

In order to make the best choice, it’s important to shop around for coverage with different life insurance companies and learn about their policy options (which could to surpass the options mentioned above).

Also, you want to look specifically at the company to decide whether it is reputable before signing on any dotted lines. The more research you conduct on coverage options and insurance companies, the better your chances will be of finding the perfect policy for you.

Stacey Bumpus started writing as a youngster, creating little fun newsletters to distribute to her elementary school friends. But it wasn’t until she completed her bachelors and masters degrees in communication that she realized her fun pastime could become a career.

After spending years in corporate communications, she discovered that freelancing was her cup of tea and fell in love with finding the latest financial news. Now, providing news and tips about taxes, mortgages, banking and even logging her efforts to save toward retirement, she’s not only fulfilling her childhood passion, but also helping others manage their finances responsibly.

California to Investigate 10 Largest Life Insurance Providers

     california to investigate 10 largest life insurance provider

Dave Jones, California’s Insurance Commissioner, has stepped up his effort to investigate top life insurance companies. The top 10 companies in the industry, the commissioner says, have been accused of not properly paying death benefits to family members after policyholders have died, which is illegal.

Companies Accused of Not Paying Benefits

Similar to an investigation against John Hancock Life Insurance Co., Jones wants to take a look at the top 10 life insurance companies under the accusation that these companies are not ensuring the beneficiaries of deceased policyholders get paid.

The fact that these companies allegedly have not been contacting beneficiaries for payout is heightened by the fact that the companies are said to make an active effort to find deceased annuity customers so that they can stop making annuity payments.

In addition to John Hancock, the states facing investigations are MetLife, Prudential, Nationwide, New York Life, Lincoln National, Sun Life Financial, The Hartford, Pacific Life and Aegon Group.

Jones intends to push for so-called market conduct examinations in 35 states, which will probe violations of the law by these companies. If insurers are found guilty of illegal claims-paying practices, they could face fines, restitution and possible license suspensions.

Evidence of Wrong-Doing Already Revealed

Jones says he has already found evidence that MetLife failed to pay money to beneficiaries for two decades and also failed to submit money to the state’s lost or abandoned fund, which was created to ensure no money is wrongfully spent by insurance companies if they are unable to find beneficiaries over a three-year period.

Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty said in state hearing that he estimates life insurers may owe beneficiaries and the 50 states more than $1 billion in unclaimed assets. The money is sitting in insurers’ retained asset accounts, which are beneficial to companies as they grow interest on those assets.

Regulators believe the 10 companies noted are trying to hold on to the money to increase their income instead of paying out to the proper parties. Jones and other regulators expect other carriers will be included in the probes in the coming months.

Life Insurance Company Sues Twitter Imposter

                  life Insurance company sues Twitter Imposter


 Coventry First is suing an anonymous critic who posted fake tweets, making the company appear to cheer for the death of policyholders. The Fort Washington, Pa.-based secondary life insurance firm filed a lawsuit on Tuesday in Philadelphia federal court, accusing the critic of unfair competition and trademark infringement.

Anonymous Critic Sends Damaging Tweets

Coventry First, which is considered a leading player in the secondary life insurance market–a market in which investors pay individuals for the right to collect on their policies–says the anonymous critic has set up the Twitter account @coventryfirst and is breaking the law by sending damaging tweets.

The tweets consist of messages like “horrible weekend … no plane crashes” and “natural disasters are good for business!” implying that the company takes pleasure in the deaths of policyholders.

The secondary life insurance (also known as life settlement) market has come under fire in recent years because of the very nature of the market–profiting on the death of another person.

The anonymous critic is jumping in on the debate with its implications that the company is not only profiting on the deaths of the policyholders it buys from, but is actually looking forward to their deaths.

Coventry Seeks Monetary Damages

The life insurer has sought a court order for monetary damages as well as the destruction of the Twitter page. In addition, the company has issued a subpoena asking Twitter to reveal the identity of the account holder.

However, the chances of shutting down the account appear uncertain due to courts’ obligations to balance overall free speech values against the rights of brand owners in trademark law.

In this case, the fact that the account was not used for commercial purposes could hinder the company’s ability to prove an infringement has occurred.

Also, the company would be responsible for proving that the fake account led to confusion in the mind of consumers–that is, consumers assumed the fake account really belonged to the insurer–which could prove difficult.