A not-so-flattering spotlight has been put on insurers’ use of retained-asset accounts in the wake of a Bloomberg article that focused on the mother of a soldier killed in Afghanistan who received her son’s death benefit through this practice.
As an Aug. 6 Wall Street Journal article notes, the courts have been looking at these accounts for years, and several federal judges have rejected claims that the use of retained-asset accounts suggest breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
According to the Journal, judges who have dismissed lawsuits filed against insurers concluded that “beneficiaries are in virtually the same position they would be in had the insurer sent them a check, because consumers can immediately withdraw the full proceeds.”
Before dismissing a case, one judge asked, "What am I missing here?"
We agree – there’s always more to the story. See a previous post on the subject.
Recent Comments