---CONTINUING- NW mutual Life ins. company denying policy refusing to pay?

Question

NW 'No there is no lapse of coverage' Me- Then why is it being denied?We were lowering the amt from $150,000 down to $100,000 & we had orig. policy almost 4 years & no lapse of coverage why is it denied?" Therefore if that's correct u have to pay it. 'we're denying it because it started a new benefit period." I sent her email saying, "Your company is owned by the people that have policies there. If you're a Christian & all our entire lives my husband & I worked w/the public on 2 jobs for total of almost 60 years between us, we always went out of our way to help people. If that's the case then this is morally & ethically wrong." I've been waiting still over a week for denial. I thought later when investigator came here he showed me form my husband signed that said he'd hadn't seen any doctors, trtmts, hosp. stays-he signed statement. that right there would void/deny 2nd policy-which means 1st one would still be in force & they have to pay. it. I wi

she only approved 2nd 1 so

Answer 1

I would hire an attorney to go after the company.  Also check in to filing a claim with your life agent's E & O (Errors and Ommisions) insurance policy.  The agent should have explained to you that your benefit preiod would start over, and they DID NOT, which makes them liable for your loss.  Most states require all life agents to have an E & O policy.

Answer 2

I'm sorry for your loss, and the pain you must have felt going through this with your husband.  I'm not sure what your religion or occupation has to do with it, but it sounds like you should get a lawyer for this.  If I understand your situation correctly (and I may not), even if the claim could be correctly denied by NML, your case may have been mishandled when you got the lower insurance amount.

Talk with a few different lawyers before deciding which one is right for you.  Good luck.

Answer 3

The agent sold you a new policy to get paid instead of just reducing the face value on the existing policy.  You still have a claim against the company because they have to approve the replacement.  They should have never approved it because it would not have necessarily been in your best ineterest.

I am making an inference because the new policy could have possibly made sense at the time.  I'm guessing not, but there is a possiblity.

Answer 4

As the above person stated, it sounds like you need an attorney.  If the agent mishandled the application, you should be able to sue him.  If the original policy was replaced instead of being reduced, the company is within its rights to deny the claim due to the 2 year contestable period.  However, most companies will allow a change to an existing policy to reduce benefits without replacing the policy or starting a new contestable period.  I think your agent just didn't do the right thing.