dugo wrote:"You have to have an economic interest in the person" when taking out a policy, American Express spokeswoman Gail Wasserman said Monday.
If you take an American blonde to the beach in Aruba you have a very big economic interest in the person. If something happens to her you're ruined.
resigned wrote:AMEX is just trying to weasel out of payment.
The policy was a standard travel insurance policy with accidental death/dismemberment clause
A similiar policy had been sold to Gary Giordano before.
That article is based on 1945 CA law. The times have changed a bit since then.
I do think that the person paying for the trip does have an economic interest in the other person whether they are casual-sex partners, business partners or domestic partners.
JMO If he had no insurable interest in his travel companion then he should not have been sold the policy.
What about group insurance for travel groups whether it be an organization or a school. Does everyone have to have an interest in each other in the group - even if the policy is just for travel expense re-imbursement?
There are some companies that take out life insurance while you work for them and maintain your policy long after you've been laid off or retire and collect on them when you kick the bucket ( dead peasants policies) ......Nice huh ?
But a man traveling with a woman who has the unfortunate luck of drowning has to jump through hoops even when 2 countries can't find that any crime occurred.
It's not as if I feel that GG "deserves" $1.5 million on Robyn's life but he does deserve to be paid whatever he is eligible through the benefits he purchased ~ if that includes the death benefit - so be it.
Should be pretty easy to get the standard policy they sell and see if there is a checkbox or something where he claims an economic interest.
I agree that they should not sell a policy to someone who does not claim an insurable interest...that would be class action lawsuit material far more expensive than just paying off Gary.
Flippy wrote:But is is also standard that you can't take out a life insurance policy on someone that you have no economic interest in, and even if you do then you need consent.
dugo wrote:Flippy wrote:But is is also standard that you can't take out a life insurance policy on someone that you have no economic interest in, and even if you do then you need consent.
What states requires consent? You should be able to underwrite a large event insurance portfolio (substantial interest ) by taking out life insurance on the president without his consent.
The Importance of Insurable Interest
Life insurance laws vary between states, but one thing that is universal is that there must be an insurable interest in the individual being insured. Put simply, the person’s death must result in a financial loss to you if you are going to insure against it. Put another way, you must gain a financial benefit from the insured person continuing to live. These two conditions sound the same, but they can be read and used in very different ways.
Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf ... z27XWjeau0
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests