Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardUnfair Trade Practices

An experienced life insurance producer is analyzing a prospective client's current financial portfolio. The client holds an active universal life insurance policy issued by Competitor Group, which has accumulated $45,000 in cash value and has completely surpassed its surrender charge period. The producer strongly advises the client to surrender the Competitor Group policy and use the funds to purchase a new universal life policy from the producer's own company. To secure this transaction, the producer provides a written projection that intentionally omits the new policy's front-end load charges and its upcoming 12-year surrender penalty schedule. This omission creates a mathematically false comparison that makes the new policy appear vastly superior. The producer does not offer any premium discounts, commission refunds, or non-contractual gifts to the client.

Under state insurance regulations, which specific unfair trade practice has this producer committed?

  1. Twisting, because the producer used an incomplete and misleading policy comparison to induce the client to replace an existing policy with a different carrier.Answer
  2. B
    Rebating, because the artificially enhanced financial projection serves as an unauthorized, non-contractual inducement to purchase the new coverage.
  3. C
    Churning, because the producer advised the client to utilize the cash value of an in-force policy to fund a new policy solely to generate a commission.
  4. D
    Sliding, because the producer intentionally concealed the front-end load charges and the new surrender penalty schedule during the sales presentation.

Answer

Twisting, because the producer used an incomplete and misleading policy comparison to induce the client to replace an existing policy with a different carrier.
The scenario perfectly describes the unfair trade practice of twisting. Twisting occurs when a producer makes incomplete or misleading comparisons about policies, or misrepresents the terms of a contract, specifically to persuade an insured to lapse, surrender, or replace an existing policy.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the producer's primary action in the scenario.
The producer intentionally omitted critical information (front-end loads and new surrender penalties) to create a false comparison between an existing in-force policy and a proposed new policy.
Identifying the exact factual nature of the violation is the first step in classifying it under state regulations.
2
Determine the producer's underlying intent.
The explicit intent of the misleading comparison was to induce the client to surrender a competitor's active policy and replace it with a new one.
The regulatory definition of an unfair trade practice often hinges on what the prohibited action was designed to achieve.
3
Match the action and intent to the statutory definitions of unfair trade practices.
Using misrepresentations or materially incomplete comparisons for the purpose of inducing the replacement of an insurance policy is the precise legal definition of twisting.
This confirms the correct classification while distinguishing it from related violations like churning or rebating.

Key Concept

Twisting (Unfair Trade Practices)
Rate this question

Topics

Unfair Trade Practices

More questions from this topic