Life Insurence ????

[seoulbrotha]

gotta get life insurence soon. was just wondering if anybody knew how long cigerettes stays in your system.:shrug: its been a about a week since i puff on one. i know the cost on insurence will likely sky rocket if your a smoker.

by the way, it helped me to quit:142smilie
thanks in advance
sb

 

[Agent 0659]

How much are you applying for? Are you sure you will even be required to get an exam?

If so, nicotine will take about 5-6 weeks. Now, i must warn you that lying on your application could give the carrier grounds for denying a claim to you IF the claim occurs in the first 2 years (2 year incontestibility clause). After 2 years, you are home free.

Now, would they deny your beneficiary the money if they uncover you lied? Very unlikely, however I have seen them go back and take all the premium they SHOULD have been collecting for you as a smoker.

But, if you suddenly develop lung cancer:nono: , I would say you will be in a bad position having lied on the app.

gl

 

[seoulbrotha]

thanks for ur reply agent,
i wasnt going to plan on lying, i just want to tell them that i quit a while ago. now i will tell them i quit years ago if they cant trace nicotine in my system

are u sure that nicotine is out of ur system in 5-6 weeks? i heard it was gonna take 5-6 months, i wasnt sure,so i figured i ask
thanks

 

[Agent 0659]

No need to tell them you quit. There will be a plainly asked question, have you smoked a cigarette (blah, blah, blah) in the last 12 months yes or no. :com:

If you decide no, and it comes back nicotine in your system it's not like you're in some sort of trouble or they would deny you coverage. Just tell them you smoked a cigar for a newborn party or some chit last week.

gl

 

[danmurphy jr]

Agent pretty much nailed it except for the time line. Your system is clear of the effects in approx. 96 hours. You then are subject to the mental or habit of the addiction. If you lie and die within the contestibility period, they will return your premiums. Pay the extra premium until you have quit for a year. I would buy a renewable term.

 

[taoist]

Now, would they deny your beneficiary the money if they uncover you lied? Very unlikely, however I have seen them go back and take all the premium they SHOULD have been collecting for you as a smoker.

But, if you suddenly develop lung cancer:nono: , I would say you will be in a bad position having lied on the app.

...agree with Agent and Dan except on these 2 points.

In a previous life, I worked in the finance department of a national insurance company...so, this perspective is from both sides of the proverbial fence....

1.) Only if it's in there best interest.... If the ins company can find a way to deny you, they will...because that's the best way to increase the bottom line... (i.e. collect the premiums, accrue the interest, deny claims and return the money you've been collecting interest on for years...) ...but they have to Prove It.

...which brings me to the counter-point to the 2nd paragraph....

2.) There have been plenty of documented cases of lung cancer in people that have never smoked anything...so, it would be incumbent upon the insurance company to Prove It.


...as for the original question about how long it's in your system, I have no idea. :shrug: but best of luck quitting.

 

[Agent 0659]

1.) Only if it's in there best interest.... If the ins company can find a way to deny you, they will...because that's the best way to increase the bottom line... )

I disagree with this. Maybe if we are talking a huge case, but on a Joe Schmo 100,000 policy no way.

I have never worked with a carrier that would stretch it that far IMO.

 

[taoist]

...like I said, "only if it's in their best interest."


...and yes, I mispelled "their" in the first post. :com:


...cost-benefit analysis. You're probably right on small policies...depending upon how long the policy has been in effect, what the pay-off is, what it would cost them to take it to trial, and the probability of winning at trial...the last 2 of which basically depend upon what they can "prove."

 

[AR182]

I disagree with this. Maybe if we are talking a huge case, but on a Joe Schmo 100,000 policy no way.

I have never worked with a carrier that would stretch it that far IMO.

i know somebody who took an ins. company to court because they refused to pay on his disablity policy....& it was past the 2 year contestible period. the case was settled while the jury was in deliberation.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

--after 5 days you will have minimal nicotine in system that generally be attributed as secondary smoke by most underwriters--they will also pick up you are smoker in APS (attending physician) if he has in his records you are a smoker.

There are companies that give reduced premiums for moderate pipe and cigar smokers.

What would happened if you lied and died. I doubt carrier would deny claim under that scenerio--I would expect they would handled it the same as mistatement of age which I had happen on one occasion. I am sure he did not deliberately state age wrong and I may have written it down wrong--however what the carrier did was pay benefit based on his actual age--ie a 100,000 death benfit decreased to 97,000 and change.

Something you might want to ask your agent about is relatively new product called ROP (return of premium) term
Cost between term and permant but very simple plan based on quarantees--if you die in term period--death benefit applies--if you live to end of term period they return all your premiums.

 

[Cappin Kirk]

Hey soul, I work for New York Life, get my e-mail from Jack and I will be glad to answer all of your questions.

 

[SixFive]

Just don't buy whole life, soulbrother.

 

[seoulbrotha]

Hey soul, I work for New York Life, get my e-mail from Jack and I will be glad to answer all of your questions.

alright, cool
how do i get ur email from jack?:shrug: lol
thanks kirk

 

[Agent 0659]

Just don't buy whole life, soulbrother.

Ridiculous statement...

 

[SixFive]

Ridiculous statement...

ridiculous for any young, healthy person to buy whole life insurance. Horrible investment.

 

[Agent 0659]

ridiculous for any young, healthy person to buy whole life insurance. Horrible investment.

With some of the options available in todays market, the flexibilty of some of the new Universal Life policies, etc.

No offense, I normally agree with you, but you are way off base.

A flexible UL can be a VERY important part of some investment portfolios. Wont work for all, but a GREAT option for others.

 

[SixFive]

With some of the options available in todays market, the flexibilty of some of the new Universal Life policies, etc.

No offense, I normally agree with you, but you are way off base.

A flexible UL can be a VERY important part of some investment portfolios. Wont work for all, but a GREAT option for others.

that's because you sell it. Soulbrother, I'm assuming is young and healthy. What's any valid reason for him to buy whole life insurance? Why spend 70 a month instead of 20? You could make a hell of a lot more investing that $50 difference than the whole life will make you. How can you dispute that??

Whole life insurance has its place in some circumstances, I will agree, but certainly not for a young healthy male (which is the assumption I made about him). DTB sells insurance, and I bet he would tell you the same thing. We've had the same discussion.

 

[Agent 0659]

that's because you sell it.

Whole life insurance has its place in some circumstances, I will agree.

So, you disagree and agree with me in the same post? :mj07:

I really don't sell life insurance. It is something I offer, and when I sell it I push term 90% of the time. But my point (which you agreed with:shrug: ) was that whole life IS a good option in some circumstances.

Don't bring that you sell it BS to me, I'm not trying to sell this guy anything, and thats not me. I'm telling you, hands down I know FAR more about this topic than you do, and you are wrong. Some people have more money than you, and zero spread loans, and a few other tax friendly options make sense in some cases.


gl

 

[SixFive]

So, you disagree and agree with me in the same post? :mj07:

I really don't sell life insurance. It is something I offer, and when I sell it I push term 90% of the time. But my point (which you agreed with:shrug: ) was that whole life IS a good option in some circumstances.

Don't bring that you sell it BS to me, I'm not trying to sell this guy anything, and thats not me. I'm telling you, hands down I know FAR more about this topic than you do, and you are wrong. Some people have more money than you, and zero spread loans, and a few other tax friendly options make sense in some cases.



gl

Still don't see any reasons for a young healthy person to have whole life. Waiting.

I would hope you would know more of the intracacies regarding this topic than I since it's your business. I know enough and have seen enough people get screwed by whole life salesmen to feel my first post was warranted. I also know about using UL and whole to protect assets. Don't think that applies here though, do u?? What am I wrong about??

I can agree to retract the because u sell it comment as that wasn't fair. GL!

 

[Agent 0659]

Still don't see any reasons for a young healthy person to have whole life. Waiting.

I would hope you would know more of the intracacies regarding this topic than I since it's your business. I know enough and have seen enough people get screwed by whole life salesmen to feel my first post was warranted. I also know about using UL and whole to protect assets. Don't think that applies here though, do u?? What am I wrong about??

I can agree to retract the because u sell it comment as that wasn't fair. GL!

You aren't wrong, necessarilly, just that your blanket statement is whats wrong. Until you know his entire circumstance, I don't think you should go throwing out the statement "whatever you do, don't buy whole life".

Lets say he is 24 and buys a 30 year term policy? So, when he is 54 and his working years are still not over, he could even have children at home still, and a variety of other things going on, he now has no insurance. Whats your theory on that? Go buy a policy and pay as a 54 year old? What if he isn't insurable at that time? Again, permanent insurance can be a part of many successfull portfolios. Your argument of buy term and invest the difference is old and outdated IMO.