Abstract
The issue of replacement of life insurance policies long has been shrouded by hostile emotions against those engaging in such activity. However, many replacements are advantageous for the policyowner, and current replacement regulations possibly have been barriers to legitimate replacement activity. The paper is divided into sections describing the history of constraints on replacement activity, the status of current replacement regulation, the results of an investigation by the Wisconsin Insurance Department of its own replacement regulation, and a proposal for a new regulation emphasizing a variation of the interest-adjusted cost comparison format.
Journal Information
The Journal of Risk and Insurance publishes rigorous, original research in insurance economics and risk management. This includes the following areas of specialization: (1) industrial organization of insurance markets; (2) management of risks in the private and public sectors; (3) insurance finance, financial pricing, financial management; (4) economics of employee benefits, pension plans, and social insurance; (5) utility theory, demand for insurance, moral hazard, and adverse selection; (6) insurance regulation; (7) actuarial and statistical methodology; and (8) economics of insurance institutions. Both theoretical and empirical submissions are encouraged. Empirical work should provide tests of hypotheses based on sound theoretical foundations. JSTOR provides a digital archive of the print version of The Journal of Risk and Insurance. The electronic version of The Journal of Risk and Insurance is available at //www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=showIssues&code;=jori. Authorized users may be able to access the full text articles at this site.
Publisher Information
The American Risk and Insurance Association (ARIA) is a worldwide group of academic, professional, and regulatory leaders in insurance, risk management, and related areas, joined together to advance the study and understanding of the field. Founded in 1932, ARIA emphasizes research relevant to the operational concerns and functions of insurance and risk management professionals and provides resources, information, and support on important insurance and risk management issues. Two main goals of the organization are 1) to expand and improve academic instruction of risk management and insurance, and, 2) to encourage research on all significant aspects of risk management and insurance.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
The Journal of Risk and Insurance © 1978 American Risk and Insurance Association
Request Permissions
Life insurance isn't a one-time purchase for many people. Reasons why they would replace their policy with a new one include changing the level of coverage, reducing the premium, or finding a policy better suited to their needs. Sometimes people are enticed into replacing their policies for reasons that may not be in their best interests, which is why strict rules, laws, and regulations to protect them are in place.
Key Takeaways
- Limitations to protect the insured are in place when it comes to replacing life insurance policies.
- Major issues with replacing a life policy include contestability, surrender fees, and churning.
- The National Association of Insurance Commissioners lays out model regulation for replacement policies, such as a specific set of questions to be asked on an insurance application and a system the insurer puts in place to monitor replacement activities.
The Problem With Replacements
Replacing a life insurance policy isn't as easy as changing your car insurance. Factors involved can negatively affect a policyholder’s coverage and future costs. Although a replacement could improve coverage or lower the premium amount, life insurance contracts include certain restrictions that might put an unwary policyholder at greater risk.
Contestability
First, life insurance contracts typically include a contestability period. This is usually two years long, during which, if the insured dies, the life insurer may contest the claim based on any misrepresentations made on the application. When a policyholder replaces a policy, that contestability period starts all over again, as does the suicide exclusion, which allows the insurer to deny a claim if the insured’s death is caused by suicide within the first two years.
Surrender Fees
For cash value policies, such as whole life, universal life or variable life, there are additional complexities that would make a replacement less desirable. For example, some policies include surrender fees, which are charged when the policy is surrendered or cash values are withdrawn within a certain period of time.
The fee is charged on any amount of cash values surrendered above a certain amount, such as 10% of the account value. The fees start out high at the beginning of the surrender period and are reduced each year until they reach zero. A policyholder replacing a policy while it is still within the surrender period has to pay the fee to transfer the cash value from one policy to another.
Churning
There is also the issue of churning by life insurance agents, which is the practice of persuading a policyholder to replace a policy for the sake of earning a new commission. It is for all of these reasons that the insurance industry, through state insurance departments and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), have established procedures that must be followed by life insurers and their contracted agents and brokers.
Replacement Regulations and Procedures
While each state department of insurance is allowed to issue its own specific rules and procedures on replacements, they are required to follow the model regulation established by the NAIC. The model regulation establishes minimum requirements that must be included in each state’s replacement procedures that must be followed by the insurers and the producers involved in the replacement.
The triggering mechanism for replacement procedures is a couple of questions typically asked on the life insurance application, such as, “Do you currently have a life insurance policy?” and “Do you plan to replace your current policy with a new one?”
A “yes” answer to both triggers a clearly defined process for handling the replacement: informing the policyholder of the implications of a replacement; submitting a notice of replacement statement signed by the policyholder and the agent to the replacing insurer, which is the company proposing to issue a new policy, and the existing insurer, which is the company whose policy is being replaced; and providing the policyholder with a hard copy of all sales materials used leading up to the transaction.
The insurer is required to demonstrate that the state’s replacement procedures are in place, including the training of producers and a system to monitor the replacement activities of all producers.
The model regulation also establishes penalties for violations, which could include revocation or suspension of a producer’s or a company’s insurance license and a monetary fine. Under certain circumstances, an insurer could be ordered to make restitution or restore the policy and cash values for the policyholder.
For those who've determined that replacing their policy is still the best move for their circumstances, it's important to take the time to find the best possible life insurance policy in order to make it worth the trouble.
Why Would Someone Want to Replace Their Life Insurance Policy?
Reasons include changing the level of coverage, reducing the premium, or finding a policy better suited to their needs. Sometimes people are enticed into replacing their policies for reasons that may not be in their best interests, which is why strict rules, laws, and regulations to protect them are in place.
What Is Churning?
This is the unethical practice of persuading a policyholder to replace a policy for the sake of earning a new commission. This is something for consumers to watch for, and it's among the reasons why the industry, through state insurance departments and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, have established procedures for replacing insurance.
What Must Consumers Also Be Aware of Regarding Insurance Replacement?
Contestibility and surrender fees are two things to also watch for. Life insurance contracts typically include a contestability period of two years, during which, if the insured dies, the life insurer may contest the claim based on any misrepresentations made on the application. Some policies include surrender fees, which are charged when the policy is surrendered or cash values are withdrawn within a certain period of time.