On a disputed policy, where the insured person died outside of the United States. The life insurance company kept investigating and asking for things. The beneficiary needed to be paid. We sued and forced the company to pay–even though they wanted to keep investigating and investigating.

Even though the beneficiary designation stated our client’s name, the other parties disputed it. They claimed that just because the insured person was very old when she made the decisions, her decisions were not really hers. They claimed elder abuse and lack of mental ability. After litigation involving the testimony of not one but two doctors, it was clear to all that this senior knew what she wanted done, even though she was older, and even though she was changing her mind from earlier years. Our client won the interpleader complaint.

The insurance company said that our clients’s mother did not answer the medical history questions truthfully. She had the policy for less than two years before unexpectedly passing. The life insurance company claimed that a doctor told her to get additional medical testing and that she was diabetic. But these were past medical records that were not very clear. It was a real question of fact. We supported our clients and knew that their mother would not lie about anything. The insurance company recognized this and ultimately paid the benefits.

The life insurance company sold the policy and collected monthly premiums for almost two years. But then the insured fell off a boat and died at sea. Even though he was never heard from again, and the public authority issued a death certificate, the insurance company was unsure if the insured one was actually dead. The insurance company tried to even argue that the insured person had misrepresented his health history on the application, because of small differences in answers to complicated questions. The life insurance company obtained all the medical records for this man going back more than ten years, in its investigation to avoid paying the life insurance benefits. We proved, to the correct evidence standard, that the insured had passed and that there was no misrepresentation. The life insurance company was forced to pay the benefits.

Our client knew that they had paid the life insurance before it was cancelled. The bills were always confusing, and the life insurance company always seemed to be adding charges, that increased the amount of the bill. But our client paid and paid. When his wife passed, the first thing the life insurance company said was “the policy is cancelled for lack of payment, we can’t pay you.” But after we got involved, the life insurance company changed its position, knowing that they had not quite followed the law and regulations. Our client received the policy payments, plus interest. This policy made a very big difference in our client’s financial future, because there were still funeral expenses to be paid.