Life Ins Policy on Cooper - Who Will Receive $$$, When?

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

al66pine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
8,789
Reaction score
37,255
Several posts have speculated about who will receive the death benefit, in light of Ross' arrest and charges.
A likely (imo) assumption re beneficiary is that at time of application & purchase of policy(ies) is that
Ross and Leanna specified --
- as primary beneficiary, Ross only and named Leanna as contingent beneficiary.
-as primary beneficiary, Ross and Leanna both, and may have not named any contingent beneficiaries
Or maybe named as contingent beneficiaries,
-his parent(s),
-her parent(s),
-Cooper's godparents (if any),
-Ross' brother (I believe his only sib)
-Leanna's sib (if any).

IIUC, life ins co's are unlikely to pay proceeds to the named benef, if homicide charges are pending against that benef.

Sometimes w no crim charges and no ongoing crim investigations,
when it receives conflicting claims, each person claiming entire proceeds as primary benef. to policy,
life ins co files a civil action, advising the court of the conflicting claims, and offering or tendering the proceeds,
to be placed in a court-designated, ct-controlled a/c.
IOW, life ins co is saying to ct -
yes, we issued a policy on (here, Cooper's) life,
yes, we have received Cooper's death certificate,
but we don't know who to pay, so let the persons involved offer their evidence in court
and let us out of it, relieve us of any further liability, other than providing the $$$ to the ct.

Re how life ins companies proceed (w conflicting claims, w crim charges pending), I found this:
http://www.thefederation.org/documents/schuman.htm. from the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel.

I'm off to read & hopefully digest and maybe bring more links.

MSM links to the following would be esp useful for this thread:
- $2000 life ins on Cooper (IIRC, provided thru Ross' HD employment or as a rider to his life ins?)
- $25,000 life ins on Cooper (IIRC, thru a policy separate from above).

It there are MSM links re the named benef's on those policies, I've missed them. Anyone?

Re discussing pro's & cons of life ins for minors, starting a new thread is approp (rather than posting here).
 
I think those policies will not be paying out on claims til the criminal charges are resolved. I do think however, that if RH is eventually found guilty and LH is not charges or charged and found not guilty, she will receive that money at some point down the road.


ETA I say that under the assumption that RH and/or LH are the named policy owners/beneficiaries or RH is the primary with LH as the secondary.
 
Who will receive life ins proceeds? When?

Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, an atty org : http://www.thefederation.org/process.cfm?pageid=2
An article from that website:
http://www.thefederation.org/documents/schuman.htm (repeating link from my post above).

The article = Life Insurance and the Homicidal Beneficiary: The Insurer's Responsibilities Under State Slayer Laws and Statutes.
WARNING: Long and Dry. 150+ footnotes (don't say I did not warn you).
Unknown date of publication.
 
tlcya said:
I think those policies will not be paying out on claims til the criminal charges are resolved. I do think however, that if RH is eventually found guilty and LH is not charges or charged and found not guilty, she will receive that money at some point down the road.


ETA I say that under the assumption that RH and/or LH are the named policy owners/beneficiaries or RH is the primary with LH as the secondary.
Click to expand...

tlcya
Shooting from the hip, I tend to agree w your thoughts.

Seems like it could be years before crim charges are resolved.
 
IIRC, Ross tried advising "his family" to file or how to submit the life ins. claim.
Any MSM link?
Approx time of first mention? Wasn't he in jail infirmary, w visitors barred until his P/C hearing?
What about phone calls (aside from atty) in infirmary? Or phone calls after P/C hearing?

Okay, maybe phone calls, so who leaked this? Jail personnel? Family member? Or?

I wonder who Ross would have been talking with - "his family" meaning
- Leanna? or
- his parents or LE brother (I believe, half-brother)? Or other (unknown to us) sibs?
- other?
 
al66pine said:
IIRC, Ross tried advising "his family" to file or how to submit the life ins. claim.
Any MSM link?
Approx time of first mention? Wasn't he in jail infirmary, w visitors barred until his P/C hearing?
What about phone calls (aside from atty) in infirmary? Or phone calls after P/C hearing?

Okay, maybe phone calls, so who leaked this? Jail personnel? Family member? Or?

I wonder who Ross would have been talking with - "his family" meaning
- Leanna? or
- his parents or LE brother (I believe, half-brother)? Or other (unknown to us) sibs?
- other?
Click to expand...
Can't wait to see his phone records.
 
C + P from Leanna thread,

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by ReadyorNot
" Why do you think she wont get the life insurance? She surely will, even if she remains a suspect. The insurance companies have a duty of showing "good faith" and cannot take advantage of the situation to avoid paying out their contractual obligations. Absent her actually being charged, they owe it and can only delay it so long."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer from PoirotryInMotion: from Leanna thread, post ~#455, July 15, 2014

"I don't know of any life insurance company that will pay out during an investigation of a suspicious death. They'll wait until knowing if hubby was involved in the death or not, first."
 
C + P from Leanna thread

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by ReadyorNot . "They will wait to see if Leanna is charged, whether JRH did it intentionally is irrelevant since they wont be paying out to him. Even if she is charged they have to pay out to someone which is possibly the grandparents."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer from PIM, Leanna thread ~ post 460, July 15, 2014

"I don't think it works that way if RH was the one who purchased the insurance...and certainly not if they find out this was murder with malice. Many think the charges will be upped to this by the time of trial. There's no hurry. Funeral's been paid for; all they have to do is say they, too, are investigating a suspicious death."
 
C + P from Leanna thread

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by human Don't insurance policies have all kinds of exclusions, among them that they don't pay if you committed a crime to get insurance?

Like if you burn your house down, you won't get the money. Can't think of other reasons, but if you kill an insured, you are not getting the money."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer from PIM, Leanna thread post ~467, July 15, 2014.
"Yes, they do. You're absolutely right. That's why there are insurance investigators. It's called fraud. Excluded under a life insurance policy is "Illegal Activity" (such as murder with malice in order to collect someone's life insurance money...). Check out the NAIC."
 
C + P from Leanna thread
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by ReadyorNot
 Who knows? The policy could specifically exclude a death resulting from neglect or abuse too. That wouldn't surprise me regarding the $25,000 child policy. But I am willing to bet the $2,000 dollar one was though his work and will be paid out regardless. We have this same policy through my husbands work. I havent read the terms but it does cover any child we have so its not a policy on each one. I think we pay like 10 dollars a year for it."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer from hopingicanhelp, Leanna thread, post ~471, July 15, 2014

"You could be right... but IME... even THOSE policies have clauses and lots of them"
 
C + P from Leanna thread

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by PoirotryInMotion
 "Yes, they do. You're absolutely right. That's why there are insurance investigators. It's called fraud. Excluded under a life insurance policy is "Illegal Activity" (such as murder with malice in order to collect someone's life insurance money...). Check out the NAIC."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer from ReadyorNot from Leanna thread, post ~469, July 15, 2014
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by ReadyorNot
"You are misunderstanding that I believe. Yes it excluded the person who killed them from collecting but not the other beneficiaries."
 
Boytwnmom
Verified Attorney


Join Date: Jul 2008Location: Berkshires, MAPosts: 1,344


Slayer Statutes



Most states have "slayer statutes" which delineate disqualification from insurance proceeds. These statutes vary by state.

In many states, if intent to murder was formed prior to purchasing the policy, the entire policy becomes void. In other states the insurer will generally file an interpleader action where bene is suspected or charged and intent was formed subsequent to policy purchase. Here is an example of one of these filed in GA-http://www.americanbar.org/content/d...thcheckdam.pdf

The majority of states follow a rule where a criminal conviction serves as prima facia evidence of guilt upon expiration of appeal rights. There may also be an extended slayer policy where members of the extended family of the murderer are also inelgible to receive the proceeds.

This is the specific GA statute. I don't have any knowledge of GA case law on this topic.





§ 33-25-13 - Receipt of benefits from insurance policy of deceased by person found guilty of committing murder or voluntary manslaughter.

No person who commits murder or voluntary manslaughter or who conspires with another to commit murder shall receive any benefits from any insurance policy on the life of the deceased, even though the person so killing or conspiring be named beneficiary in the insurance policy. A plea of guilty or a judicial finding of guilt not reversed or otherwise set aside as to any of such crimes shall be prima-facie evidence of guilt in determining rights under this Code section. All right, interest, estate, and proceeds in such an insurance policy shall go to the other heirs of the deceased who may be entitled thereto by the laws of descent and distribution of this state, unless secondary beneficiaries be named in the policy, in which event such secondary beneficiaries shall take.

HISTORY: Code 1933, § 56-2506, enacted by Ga. L. 1960, p. 289, § 1. http://http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/gacode/
 
C + P from Leanna thread

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by ReadyorNot
You are misunderstanding that I believe. Yes it excluded the person who killed them from collecting but not the other beneficiaries."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer from PIM. from Leanna thread post ~472, July 15, 2014
'Well, it'd depend on the specific policy wording, I suppose; but if RH goes does down it would not at all surprise me if LH follows. The benefits would not keep on trying to go to next of kin, afaik, (eg. Grandparents), if both parents were found complicit, especially concerning that $25,000 life insurance policy bought in late 2012 for Cooper. There is a 2-year contestancy period allowed that would effectively tie that money up in court (to prove LH was not an accessory even if the criminal courts didn't pursue that); this would quickly dissipate that sum of money. So in the end, I don't see anyone profiting from CH's death, here."

"One representative explained that the only time they ever hold payment is if the death occurs within the two year contestable period, or if the cause of death listed on the death certificate is “homicide”. In this case, they follow up with the police and ask if the beneficiary is a suspect in the murder. If so, they hold payment until charges are dropped or the beneficiary is acquitted of the crime." (An example of just one insurance blog's info) - http://www.insuranceblogbychris.com/...s-not-payable/".

ETA [also from PIM]

Ask the Life Insurance Expert
I have term life insurance on my daughter. Will the insurance company pay benefits if she is murdered?

Yes, life insurance will pay out in cases of murder – except where the policy owner (you) has committed the murder.
http://www.insure.com/articles/lifei...ut-murder.html
 
Lovejac said:
Boytwnmom
Verified Attorney
....
Slayer Statutes
Most states have "slayer statutes" which delineate disqualification from insurance proceeds. These statutes vary by state.

In many states, if intent to murder was formed prior to purchasing the policy, the entire policy becomes void. In other states the insurer will generally file an interpleader action where bene is suspected or charged and intent was formed subsequent to policy purchase.

Here is an example of one of these filed in GA. http://www.americanbar.org/content/d...thcheckdam.pdf ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

boytwnmom

In looking at the complaint for Interpleader, it appears similar (imo) to others I have seen where no crim action or event is suspected re the insured's death. Looks similar to some where ins co as received claims for death benefits from two people, each saying that he/she is the exclusive benef.

Or would an Interpleader w benef. suspected of, charged w or convicted of insured's death
be drastically different from the civil-only petitions?

Anyone? Thx in adv.
Click to expand...
 
Bumping

PoirotryInMotion said:
Here is boytwnmom's whole post - (with Georgia statute written out):

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?248989-LeAnna-(Mom)&p=10754562#post10754562
Click to expand...

Lovejac said:
Boytwnmom
Verified Attorney


Join Date: Jul 2008Location: Berkshires, MAPosts: 1,344


Slayer Statutes



Most states have "slayer statutes" which delineate disqualification from insurance proceeds. These statutes vary by state.

In many states, if intent to murder was formed prior to purchasing the policy, the entire policy becomes void. In other states the insurer will generally file an interpleader action where bene is suspected or charged and intent was formed subsequent to policy purchase. Here is an example of one of these filed in GA-http://www.americanbar.org/content/d...thcheckdam.pdf

The majority of states follow a rule where a criminal conviction serves as prima facia evidence of guilt upon expiration of appeal rights. There may also be an extended slayer policy where members of the extended family of the murderer are also inelgible to receive the proceeds.

This is the specific GA statute. I don't have any knowledge of GA case law on this topic.





§ 33-25-13 - Receipt of benefits from insurance policy of deceased by person found guilty of committing murder or voluntary manslaughter.

No person who commits murder or voluntary manslaughter or who conspires with another to commit murder shall receive any benefits from any insurance policy on the life of the deceased, even though the person so killing or conspiring be named beneficiary in the insurance policy. A plea of guilty or a judicial finding of guilt not reversed or otherwise set aside as to any of such crimes shall be prima-facie evidence of guilt in determining rights under this Code section. All right, interest, estate, and proceeds in such an insurance policy shall go to the other heirs of the deceased who may be entitled thereto by the laws of descent and distribution of this state, unless secondary beneficiaries be named in the policy, in which event such secondary beneficiaries shall take.

HISTORY: Code 1933, § 56-2506, enacted by Ga. L. 1960, p. 289, § 1. http://http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/gacode/
Click to expand...
 
I didn't look at it closely so not certain but I don't think the underlying issue, in this case bene=murderer, matters. It's really the issue where InsCo basically says they can't make this type of determination as it requires a judicial determination and they aren't trying to avoid payment so they will cough up the money and give it to the court and the court gets to decide who, if anyone, deserves the policy proceeds. It does often involve competing claims but it also happens when the Ins Co doesn't want to pay a suspected murderer, at least in most states. As this is a matter of state substantive and procedural law actual practice may vary by state.




al66pine said:
Lovejac said:
Boytwnmom
Verified Attorney
....
Slayer Statutes
Most states have "slayer statutes" which delineate disqualification from insurance proceeds. These statutes vary by state.

In many states, if intent to murder was formed prior to purchasing the policy, the entire policy becomes void. In other states the insurer will generally file an interpleader action where bene is suspected or charged and intent was formed subsequent to policy purchase.

Here is an example of one of these filed in GA. http://www.americanbar.org/content/d...thcheckdam.pdf ....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

boytwnmom

In looking at the complaint for Interpleader, it appears similar (imo) to others I have seen where no crim action or event is suspected re the insured's death. Looks similar to some where ins co as received claims for death benefits from two people, each saying that he/she is the exclusive benef.

Or would an Interpleader w benef. suspected of, charged w or convicted of insured's death
be drastically different from the civil-only petitions?

Anyone? Thx in adv.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Boytwnmom said:
I didn't look at it closely so not certain but I don't think the underlying issue, in this case bene=murderer, matters. It's really the issue where InsCo basically says they can't make this type of determination as it requires a judicial determination and they aren't trying to avoid payment so they will cough up the money and give it to the court and the court gets to decide who, if anyone, deserves the policy proceeds. It does often involve competing claims but it also happens when the Ins Co doesn't want to pay a suspected murderer, at least in most states. As this is a matter of state substantive and procedural law actual practice may vary by state.
Click to expand...

So if both are found guilty of murder, the State would send the money back to the insurance company, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 101 more.
Total: 3,977 (members: 102, guests: 3,875)

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
3,875
Total visitors
3,977
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,530
Messages
17,954,000
Members
228,522
Latest member
Cabinsleuth
Back
Top