Long-Term Care Insurance--Not

Chris,

I was disappointed in your review of long term care insurance. It would have been appropriate to name the companies in the New York Times article than to gneralize. You painted a broad brush and failed to point out how many people have benefited from the product. This product has been around since 1974. One company, Genworth Financial -- formerly G. E. Capital Assurance, has paid out more than 2.3 Billion dollars in claims.
This product, like certain investment advise, is appropriate for everyone. The consumer needs to seek the advise of a specialist who can help them evaluate companies and policies.
Just as you encourage your listeners to gain more education in investment areas, I encourage you to gain more information on long term care insurance. I would be glad to point you to long term care insurance experts who could answer your questions...
You have an excellent program but I would ask that you do more investigating and educating before you generalize on long term care insurance.

Thank you for your consideration.

This product, like certain investment advise, is NOT appropriate for everyone.

Dear Mr. Farrell-Regarding your unfortunate comments on LTC insurance (LTCi) based on the NYT article:
The Conseco policy they are discussing here is the 17-35 year old “medically necessary” early LTCi policy where there can be a lot of confusion as to exactly when you qualify. Before 1996, many of these policies were sold and the standards of some carriers were not good. Some carriers sold to people with failing health already at low cost and had a problem paying the resulting claims, so they raised rates and may have tried to save money by making claims more difficult. Other old guard (1974) LTC companies have gone out of their way to pay claims on their old "nursing home only" policies even though by the legal definitions of the plans they would not have had to—people were in assisted living facilities, not “nursing homes.” Home and assisted living were never even mentioned in pre '92 policies as a rule, since those industries were virtually non-existent at that time. The 3 day hospital clause was a result of insurance companies basing disability on the Medicare model. In the last decade, hospitals discharge people faster. The problems we are seeing with those old policies today were because the industry was young and the only perceived economic risk at that time was the nursing home cost.

The policies I recommend are all Tax Qualified (TQ-1996 HIPAA laws) and have very definite and observable benefit triggers like bathing and dressing assistance or severe cognitive impairment. These requirements are mandated in TQ LTCi by the federal government and were a result of claims issues such as the NYT story relates.
The major LTCi companies used today, as can be seen by their complaint percentage of only 0.01% in the NYT company statistics chart, have very few complaints--certainly well within any industry best practices. Conseco and Continental Casualty no longer sell individual LTC insurance. Bankers Life is associated with Conseco--I am not certain of the legal connection. I have personally seen close to 100 claims on policies I had sold with no problems (that ARE easy to understand) dating from 1992 and up. My clients will gladly give you their claims experiences in order to save other Americans the tragedy of not knowing what to do, doing too much themselves and going broke in retirement from lack of this type of savings protection. I am appalled that you would quote Consumer's Reports (CR) as that has been thoroughly debunked as a reputable source of information on long term care insurance. Contact Phyllis Shelton at http://www.ltcconsultants.com and Steve Moses' www.CenterLTC.com for discerning critiques of the CR articles.
As for recommending group LTCi--true Group LTC plans generally provide fewer benefits at higher cost, and waiting to even 59 is treading on thin ice as far as getting a low price for the rest of your life with a good health discount. The coverage available at 40 would cost triple at 55 and be 6X more at 70—just taking into account that the $200/day needed today will double every 14.4 years with ONLY 5% compound inflation. Buying it young with level premium and compounded inflation on the benefits beats waiting to pay more later. Anyone putting this healthcare insurance off even one year will pay more in aggregate for the same plan to age 85 compared to younger buyers--no money saved, lots more risk of being uninsurable as well as a catastrophic risk of needing care at age 47, as a friend of mine did with a permanently debilitating stroke.
The Baby Boom is here now. We are seeing the cost of gas going up with supply and demand. So too will the cost of care. If respected advisors like you do not support the most cost effective way for folks to prepare for the costs of their coming long term debilitating conditions, our welfare system, broken already, will crumble and leave our children with parents to diaper and no inheritances.
The NBC series, Trading Places, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17134636/print/1/displaymode/1098/ has 5,000+ stories of the heartbreak of long term care-giving. LTC insurance has the answer.
Other links:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17662287/site/newsweek
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2007/03/26/2007-03-26_planning_now_for_later_.html

As my client wrote below, LTC insurance is about a lot more than the money:
When my wife became very ill with pulmonary fibrosis she needed home care. Enter our insurer. We had a wonderful caring and professional nursing aide attend her four hours a day. Your LTC insurance paid for her. She needed a wide variety of supplies. Your LTC insurance paid for them. Your LTC insurance covered everything. But it was not that they simply covered Patricia’s needs, it was the concerned, helpful, and prompt way they did it that impressed us so much. From Patricia’s initial evaluation from a nurse you sent to our house to evaluate her to the wonderful case worker who stayed in touch with us consistently, our LTC insurance company, including you, could not have been nicer or more efficient. Your program made my wife’s last days infinitely more comfortable, and for that I am eternally grateful

Dear Mr. Henning,

In reviewing your post, I wanted to bring additional information that you might review before you post your next fact filled opinion article on long term care insurance.

With respect to your allegations that Long Term Care insurance is not something that should be purchased or is in someway a scam on the consumer, you might consider these points:

1) The Motley Fool's article from 2006 came to an entirely different conclusion after signicant due dilligence and footnoted research.

2) Consumer Reports published three "studies" and recomendations about long term care insurance, not just the one that you referred to in your posting. The first was in the early 1990's and CR selected a company as the best choice that was bankrupt by the time the magazine hit the racks. The second was in the late 90's and touted as "best" Penn Treaty - Network America's products - partially because they were non-tax qualified. The third npublished in 2003 attacked the industry as a whole.

In general, Consurmer Reports does a good job on rating appliances and the like but should leave financial product evaluation to professionals.

3) You might consider reading other NY newspapers other than the Times. Had you taken the time to read the NY Daily News on the same day, you would have found their article on long term care and long term care insurance. It paints a very different picture than the Times article and title.

4) In the late 1990's the IFPA determined that a Financial Planner members who did not approach their client about long term care insurance as part of the planning process might have signficant liability for the future care bills of that same client.

Recently one similar case was arbitrated in Nevada. The planner's E & O insurer paid a $600K claim for long term care costs of the planner's clients. According to the article, the award was due to the fact that there was insufficent evidence to show where the client were presented the product by the planners and refused to purchase. The article outlining this situation appeared in Register Representative Magazine in April of 2006.

5) Major American corporations are today offing long term care insurance as an employee benefit option. Are you intimating by your article that these major corporation have somehow not done their due dilligence and offer their employees somthing that is not proper for them to purchase?

6) In 1996 the Kennedy Kassabaum Health Care reform act passed in a bipartisan fashion codified the standarization of long term care insurance policies to be issued going forward, codified the tax treatment of the dollars paid for care claims and promoted long term care insurance as product that should be utlized to pay for future care bills not a government program. Were all of the supporter of this major healtcare reform legistlation somehow misled into passing this landmark legislation?

7) The American Assoication of Long Term Care Insurerance recently published a major industry wide study on long term care insurance claims paid. The dollars paid out for the year recorded by all insurers was $3.6 billion dollars. 66% of these dollars were paid to policyholders for home health care and assisted living care. Are you intimating that these claims payments as reported not accurate?

If you are to position yourself as an expert on specific financial products, it might be wise to be well read on a subject before offering a fountain of advice.

David Hensley
Asset Protection Network, Inc.

Mr. Farrell - Your comments have merit in that they should alert the consumer to make sure they're dealing with a sound and stable long term care insurance company, just as they should if they were buying a million dollar life insurance policy!

There have been positive changes in this industry over the last 7+ years, many of which directly address the concerns spelled out in the "unique" views of the 2003 Consumer's Union report.

Did you noticed the graph of complaints filed against the top sellers of long term care insurance accompanying the NY Times article? According to that report, several of the "big name" carriers have a 99% customer satisfaction rate. Considering over 3 billion dollars were paid out in 2006 for long term care policy claims, you have to agree that's a pretty good track record. I can send you a copy of that graph if you wish.

I also agree with your statement that this product is not for everyone, but that does not mean it not right for anyone either. The best way someone can separate the facts from the hype is to take time and speak with an agent or preferably an independent broker who has an extensive background working with long term care insurance.

Respectfully

David Latch, CLTC, LTCP
Maryland Long Term Care Insurance Group

I and several others have sent in comments that have not been posted. Is there a limit to what is desseminated to the pulic on American Public Media? What is the basis of what is accepted? What is the agenda?
Thank you. Most of your advice is quite useful.
bh

Dear Mr. Farrell-Regarding your unfortunate comments on LTC insurance (LTCi) based on the NYT article:
The Conseco policy they are discussing here is the 17-35 year old “medically necessary” early LTCi policy where there can be a lot of confusion as to exactly when you qualify. Before 1996, many of these policies were sold and the standards of some carriers were not good. Some carriers sold to people with failing health already at low cost and had a problem paying the resulting claims, so they raised rates and may have tried to save money by making claims more difficult. Other old guard (1974) LTC companies have gone out of their way to pay claims on their old "nursing home only" policies even though by the legal definitions of the plans they would not have had to—people were in assisted living facilities, not “nursing homes.” Home and assisted living were never even mentioned in pre '92 policies as a rule, since those industries were virtually non-existent at that time. The 3 day hospital clause was a result of insurance companies basing disability on the Medicare model. In the last decade, hospitals discharge people faster. The problems we are seeing with those old policies today were because the industry was young and the only perceived economic risk at that time was the nursing home cost.

The policies I recommend are all Tax Qualified (TQ-1996 HIPAA laws) and have very definite and observable benefit triggers like bathing and dressing assistance or severe cognitive impairment. These requirements are mandated in TQ LTCi by the federal government and were a result of claims issues such as the NYT story relates.
The major LTCi companies used today, as can be seen by their complaint percentage of only 0.01% in the NYT company statistics chart, have very few complaints--certainly well within any industry best practices. Conseco and Continental Casualty no longer sell individual LTC insurance. Bankers Life is associated with Conseco--I am not certain of the legal connection. I have personally seen close to 100 claims on policies I had sold with no problems (that ARE easy to understand) dating from 1992 and up. My clients will gladly give you their claims experiences in order to save other Americans the tragedy of not knowing what to do, doing too much themselves and going broke in retirement from lack of this type of savings protection. I am appalled that you would quote Consumer's Reports (CR) as that has been thoroughly debunked as a reputable source of information on long term care insurance. Contact Phyllis Shelton at http://www.ltcconsultants.com and Steve Moses' www.CenterLTC.com for discerning critiques of the CR articles.
As for recommending group LTCi--true Group LTC plans generally provide fewer benefits at higher cost, and waiting to even 59 is treading on thin ice as far as getting a low price for the rest of your life with a good health discount. The coverage available at 40 would cost triple at 55 and be 6X more at 70—just taking into account that the $200/day needed today will double every 14.4 years with ONLY 5% compound inflation. Buying it young with level premium and compounded inflation on the benefits beats waiting to pay more later. Anyone putting this healthcare insurance off even one year will pay more in aggregate for the same plan to age 85 compared to younger buyers--no money saved, lots more risk of being uninsurable as well as a catastrophic risk of needing care at age 47, as a friend of mine did with a permanently debilitating stroke.
The Baby Boom is here now. We are seeing the cost of gas going up with supply and demand. So too will the cost of care. If respected advisors like you do not support the most cost effective way for folks to prepare for the costs of their coming long term debilitating conditions, our welfare system, broken already, will crumble and leave our children with parents to diaper and no inheritances.
The NBC series, Trading Places, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17134636/print/1/displaymode/1098/ has 5,000+ stories of the heartbreak of long term care-giving. LTC insurance has the answer.
Other links:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17662287/site/newsweek
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2007/03/26/2007-03-26_planning_now_for_later_.html

As my client wrote below, LTC insurance is about a lot more than the money:
When my wife became very ill with pulmonary fibrosis she needed home care. Enter our insurer. We had a wonderful caring and professional nursing aide attend her four hours a day. Your LTC insurance paid for her. She needed a wide variety of supplies. Your LTC insurance paid for them. Your LTC insurance covered everything. But it was not that they simply covered Patricia’s needs, it was the concerned, helpful, and prompt way they did it that impressed us so much. From Patricia’s initial evaluation from a nurse you sent to our house to evaluate her to the wonderful case worker who stayed in touch with us consistently, our LTC insurance company, including you, could not have been nicer or more efficient. Your program made my wife’s last days infinitely more comfortable, and for that I am eternally grateful

Dear Mr. Farrell-Regarding your unfortunate comments on LTC insurance (LTCi) based on the NYT article:
The Conseco policy they are discussing here is the 17-35 year old “medically necessary” early LTCi policy where there can be a lot of confusion as to exactly when you qualify. Before 1996, many of these policies were sold and the standards of some carriers were not good. Some carriers sold to people with failing health already at low cost and had a problem paying the resulting claims, so they raised rates and may have tried to save money by making claims more difficult. Other old guard (1974) LTC companies have gone out of their way to pay claims on their old "nursing home only" policies even though by the legal definitions of the plans they would not have had to—people were in assisted living facilities, not “nursing homes.” Home and assisted living were never even mentioned in pre '92 policies as a rule, since those industries were virtually non-existent at that time. The 3 day hospital clause was a result of insurance companies basing disability on the Medicare model. In the last decade, hospitals discharge people faster. The problems we are seeing with those old policies today were because the industry was young and the only perceived economic risk at that time was the nursing home cost.

The policies I recommend are all Tax Qualified (TQ-1996 HIPAA laws) and have very definite and observable benefit triggers like bathing and dressing assistance or severe cognitive impairment. These requirements are mandated in TQ LTCi by the federal government and were a result of claims issues such as the NYT story relates.

The major LTCi companies used today, as can be seen by their complaint percentage of only 0.01% in the NYT company statistics chart, have very few complaints--certainly well within any industry best practices. Conseco and Continental Casualty no longer sell individual LTC insurance. Bankers Life is associated with Conseco--I am not certain of the legal connection. I have personally seen close to 100 claims on policies I had sold with no problems (that ARE easy to understand) dating from 1992 and up. My clients will gladly give you their claims experiences in order to save other Americans the tragedy of not knowing what to do, doing too much themselves and going broke in retirement from lack of this type of savings protection. I am appalled that you would quote Consumer's Reports (CR) as that has been thoroughly debunked as a reputable source of information on long term care insurance. Contact Phyllis Shelton at http://www.ltcconsultants.com and Steve Moses' www.CenterLTC.com for discerning critiques of the CR articles.

As for recommending group LTCi--true Group LTC plans generally provide fewer benefits at higher cost, and waiting to even 59 is treading on thin ice as far as getting a low price for the rest of your life with a good health discount. The coverage available at 40 would cost triple at 55 and be 6X more at 70—just taking into account that the $200/day needed today will double every 14.4 years with ONLY 5% compound inflation. Buying it young with level premium and compounded inflation on the benefits beats waiting to pay more later. Anyone putting this healthcare insurance off even one year will pay more in aggregate for the same plan to age 85 compared to younger buyers--no money saved, lots more risk of being uninsurable as well as a catastrophic risk of needing care at age 47, as a friend of mine did with a permanently debilitating stroke.

The Baby Boom is here now. We are seeing the cost of gas going up with supply and demand. So too will the cost of care. If respected advisors like you do not support the most cost effective way for folks to prepare for the costs of their coming long term debilitating conditions, our welfare system, broken already, will crumble and leave our children with parents to diaper and no inheritances.

The NBC series, Trading Places, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17134636/print/1/displaymode/1098/ has 5,000+ stories of the heartbreak of long term care-giving. LTC insurance has the answer.
Other links:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17662287/site/newsweek
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2007/03/26/2007-03-26_planning_now_for_later_.html

As my client wrote below, LTC insurance is about a lot more than the money:
"When my wife became very ill with pulmonary fibrosis she needed home care. Enter our insurer. We had a wonderful caring and professional nursing aide attend her four hours a day. Your LTC insurance paid for her. She needed a wide variety of supplies. Your LTC insurance paid for them. Your LTC insurance covered everything. But it was not that they simply covered Patricia’s needs, it was the concerned, helpful, and prompt way they did it that impressed us so much. From Patricia’s initial evaluation from a nurse you sent to our house to evaluate her to the wonderful case worker who stayed in touch with us consistently, our LTC insurance company, including you, could not have been nicer or more efficient. Your program made my wife’s last days infinitely more comfortable, and for that I am eternally grateful"

My life's been bland. I've basically been doing nothing to speak of, but what can I say? Not that it matters. Eh. Such is life.