assignment for insurance policies

Assignment of insurance policies and claims | Practical Law

Assignment of insurance policies and claims

Practical law uk practice note w-031-6021  (approx. 19 pages).

• Search Search Please fill out this field.
• Life Insurance
• Definitions

What Is a Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance?

Charlene Rhinehart is a CPA , CFE, chair of an Illinois CPA Society committee, and has a degree in accounting and finance from DePaul University.

A collateral assignment of life insurance is a conditional assignment appointing a lender as an assignee of a policy. Essentially, the lender has a claim to some or all of the death benefit until the loan is repaid. The death benefit is used as collateral for a loan.

The advantage to using a collateral assignee over naming the lender as a beneficiary is that you can specify that the lender is only entitled to a certain amount, namely the amount of the outstanding loan. That would allow your beneficiaries still be entitled to any remaining death benefit.

Lenders commonly require that life insurance serve as collateral for a business loan to guarantee repayment if the borrower dies or defaults. They may even require you to get a life insurance policy to be approved for a business loan.

Key Takeaways

• The borrower of a business loan using life insurance as collateral must be the policy owner, who may or may not be the insured.
• The collateral assignment helps you avoid naming a lender as a beneficiary.
• The collateral assignment may be against all or part of the policy's value.
• If any amount of the death benefit remains after the lender is paid, it is distributed to beneficiaries.
• Once the loan is fully repaid, the life insurance policy is no longer used as collateral.

How a Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance Works

Collateral assignments make sure the lender gets paid only what they are due. The borrower must be the owner of the policy, but they do not have to be the insured person. And the policy must remain current for the life of the loan, with the policy owner continuing to pay all premiums . You can use either term or whole life insurance policy as collateral, but the death benefit must meet the lender's terms.

A permanent life insurance policy with a cash value allows the lender access to the cash value to use as loan payment if the borrower defaults. Many lenders don't accept term life insurance policies as collateral because they do not accumulate cash value.

Alternately, the policy owner's access to the cash value is restricted to protect the collateral. If the loan is repaid before the borrower's death, the assignment is removed, and the lender is no longer the beneficiary of the death benefit.

Insurance companies must be notified of the collateral assignment of a policy. However, other than their obligation to meet the terms of the contract, they are not involved in the agreement.

Example of Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance

For example, say you have a business plan for a floral shop and need a $50,000 loan to get started. When you apply for the loan, the bank says you must have collateral in the form of a life insurance policy to back it up. You have a whole life insurance policy with a cash value of $65,000 and a death benefit of $300,000, which the bank accepts as collateral.

So, you then designate the bank as the policy's assignee until you repay the $50,000 loan. That way, the bank can ensure it will be repaid the funds it lent you, even if you died. In this case, because the cash value and death benefit is more than what you owe the lender, your beneficiaries would still inherit money.

Alternatives to Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance

Using a collateral assignment to secure a business loan can help you access the funds you need to start or grow your business. However, you would be at risk of losing your life insurance policy if you defaulted on the loan, meaning your beneficiaries may not receive the money you'd planned for them to inherit.

Consult with a financial advisor to discuss whether a collateral assignment or one of these alternatives may be most appropriate for your financial situation.

Life insurance loan (policy loan) : If you already have a life insurance policy with a cash value, you can likely borrow against it. Policy loans are not taxed and have less stringent requirements such as no credit or income checks. However, this option would not work if you do not already have a permanent life insurance policy because the cash value component takes time to build.

Surrendering your policy : You can also surrender your policy to access any cash value you've built up. However, your beneficiaries would no longer receive a death benefit.

Other loan types : Finally, you can apply for other loans, such as a personal loan, that do not require life insurance as collateral. You could use loans that rely on other types of collateral, such as a home equity loan that uses your home equity.

What Are the Benefits of Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance?

A collateral assignment of a life insurance policy may be required if you need a business loan. Lenders typically require life insurance as collateral for business loans because they guarantee repayment if the borrower dies. A policy with cash value can guarantee repayment if the borrower defaults.

What Kind of Life Insurance Can Be Used for Collateral?

You can typically use any type of life insurance policy as collateral for a business loan, depending on the lender's requirements. A permanent life insurance policy with a cash value allows the lender a source of funds to use if the borrower defaults. Some lenders may not accept term life insurance policies, which have no cash value. The lender will typically require the death benefit be a certain amount, depending on your loan size.

Is Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance Irrevocable?

A collateral assignment of life insurance is irrevocable. So, the policyholder may not use the cash value of a life insurance policy dedicated toward collateral for a loan until that loan has been repaid.

What is the Difference Between an Assignment and a Collateral Assignment?

With an absolute assignment , the entire ownership of the policy would be transferred to the assignee, or the lender. Then, the lender would be entitled to the full death benefit. With a collateral assignment, the lender is only entitled to the balance of the outstanding loan.

The Bottom Line

If you are applying for life insurance to secure your own business loan, remember you do not need to make the lender the beneficiary. Instead you can use a collateral assignment. Consult a financial advisor or insurance broker who can walk you through the process and explain its pros and cons as they apply to your situation.

Progressive. " Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance ."

Fidelity Life. " What Is a Collateral Assignment of a Life Insurance Policy? "

Kansas Legislative Research Department. " Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance Proceeds ."

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices

Policygenius does not allow the submission of personal information by users located within the EU or the UK. If you believe this action is in error, or have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]

Collateral assignment of life insurance

Advertiser disclosure.

We are an independent, advertising-supported comparison service. Our goal is to help you make smarter financial decisions by providing you with interactive tools and financial calculators, publishing original and objective content, by enabling you to conduct research and compare information for free - so that you can make financial decisions with confidence.

Our content is backed by Coverage.com, LLC, a licensed insurance producer (NPN: 19966249). Coverage.com services are only available in states where it is licensed . Coverage.com may not offer insurance coverage in all states or scenarios. All insurance products are governed by the terms in the applicable insurance policy, and all related decisions (such as approval for coverage, premiums, commissions and fees) and policy obligations are the sole responsibility of the underwriting insurer. The information on this site does not modify any insurance policy terms in any way.

How We Make Money

The offers that appear on this site are from companies that compensate us. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site, including, for example, the order in which they may appear within the listing categories, except where prohibited by law for our mortgage, home equity and other home lending products. But this compensation does not influence the information we publish, or the reviews that you see on this site. We do not include the universe of companies or financial offers that may be available to you.

• Share this article on Facebook Facebook
• Share this article on Twitter Twitter
• Share this article on LinkedIn Linkedin
• Share this article via email Email

At Bankrate, we take the accuracy of our content seriously.

“Expert verified” means that our Financial Review Board thoroughly evaluated the article for accuracy and clarity. The Review Board comprises a panel of financial experts whose objective is to ensure that our content is always objective and balanced.

Their reviews hold us accountable for publishing high-quality and trustworthy content.

• • Auto insurance
• • Life insurance
• Connect with Mary Van Keuren on LinkedIn Linkedin
• Get in contact with Mary Van Keuren via Email Email

• Connect with Natasha Cornelius, CLU on LinkedIn Linkedin

The Bankrate promise

At Bankrate we strive to help you make smarter financial decisions. While we adhere to strict editorial integrity , this post may contain references to products from our partners. Here's an explanation for how we make money . This content is powered by HomeInsurance.com (NPN: 8781838). For more information, please see our Insurance Disclosure .

Founded in 1976, Bankrate has a long track record of helping people make smart financial choices. We’ve maintained this reputation for over four decades by demystifying the financial decision-making process and giving people confidence in which actions to take next.

Bankrate follows a strict editorial policy , so you can trust that we’re putting your interests first. All of our content is authored by highly qualified professionals and edited by subject matter experts , who ensure everything we publish is objective, accurate and trustworthy.

Our banking reporters and editors focus on the points consumers care about most — the best banks, latest rates, different types of accounts, money-saving tips and more — so you can feel confident as you’re managing your money.

Editorial integrity

Bankrate follows a strict editorial policy , so you can trust that we’re putting your interests first. Our award-winning editors and reporters create honest and accurate content to help you make the right financial decisions.

Key Principles

We value your trust. Our mission is to provide readers with accurate and unbiased information, and we have editorial standards in place to ensure that happens. Our editors and reporters thoroughly fact-check editorial content to ensure the information you’re reading is accurate. We maintain a firewall between our advertisers and our editorial team. Our editorial team does not receive direct compensation from our advertisers.

Editorial Independence

Bankrate’s editorial team writes on behalf of YOU – the reader. Our goal is to give you the best advice to help you make smart personal finance decisions. We follow strict guidelines to ensure that our editorial content is not influenced by advertisers. Our editorial team receives no direct compensation from advertisers, and our content is thoroughly fact-checked to ensure accuracy. So, whether you’re reading an article or a review, you can trust that you’re getting credible and dependable information.

How we make money

You have money questions. Bankrate has answers. Our experts have been helping you master your money for over four decades. We continually strive to provide consumers with the expert advice and tools needed to succeed throughout life’s financial journey.

Bankrate follows a strict editorial policy , so you can trust that our content is honest and accurate. Our award-winning editors and reporters create honest and accurate content to help you make the right financial decisions. The content created by our editorial staff is objective, factual, and not influenced by our advertisers.

We’re transparent about how we are able to bring quality content, competitive rates, and useful tools to you by explaining how we make money.

Bankrate.com is an independent, advertising-supported publisher and comparison service. We are compensated in exchange for placement of sponsored products and, services, or by you clicking on certain links posted on our site. Therefore, this compensation may impact how, where and in what order products appear within listing categories, except where prohibited by law for our mortgage, home equity and other home lending products. Other factors, such as our own proprietary website rules and whether a product is offered in your area or at your self-selected credit score range can also impact how and where products appear on this site. While we strive to provide a wide range offers, Bankrate does not include information about every financial or credit product or service.

Insurance Disclosure

This content is powered by HomeInsurance.com, a licensed insurance producer (NPN: 8781838) and a corporate affiliate of Bankrate.com. HomeInsurance.com LLC services are only available in states where it is licensed and insurance coverage through HomeInsurance.com may not be available in all states. All insurance products are governed by the terms in the applicable insurance policy, and all related decisions (such as approval for coverage, premiums, commissions and fees) and policy obligations are the sole responsibility of the underwriting insurer. The information on this site does not modify any insurance policy terms in any way.

Secured loans are often used by individuals needing financial resources for any reason, whether it’s to fund a business, remodel a home or pay medical bills. One asset that may be used for a secured loan is life insurance. Although there are pros and cons to this type of financial transaction, it can be an excellent way to access needed funding. Bankrate’s insurance editorial team discusses what a collateral assignment of life insurance is and when it might—or might not—be the best loan option for you.

What is collateral assignment of life insurance?

A collateral assignment of life insurance is a method of securing a loan by using a life insurance policy as collateral . If you pass away before the loan is repaid, the lender can collect the outstanding loan balance from the death benefit of your life insurance policy . Any remaining funds from the death benefit would then be disbursed to the policy’s designated beneficiary(ies).

Why use life insurance as collateral?

Collateral assignment of life insurance may be a useful option if you want to access funds without placing any of your assets, such as a car or house, at risk. If you already have a life insurance policy, it can be a simple process to assign it as collateral. You may even be able to use your policy as collateral for more than one loan, which is called cross-collateralization, if there is enough value in the policy.

Collateral assignment may also be a credible choice if your credit rating is not high, which can make it difficult to find attractive loan terms. Since your lender can rely on your policy’s death benefit to pay off the loan if necessary, they are more likely to give you favorable terms despite a low credit score.

Pros and cons of using life insurance as collateral

If you are considering collateral assignment, here are some pros and cons of this type of financial arrangement.

• It may be an affordable option, especially if your life insurance premiums are less than your payments would be for an unsecured loan with a higher interest rate.
• You will not need to place personal property, such as your home, as collateral, which you would need to do if you take out a secured loan. Instead, if you pass away before the loan is repaid, lenders will be paid from the policy’s death benefit. Any remaining payout goes to your named beneficiaries.
• You may find lenders who are eager to work with you since life insurance is generally considered a good choice for collateral.
• The amount that your beneficiaries would have received will be reduced if you pass away before the loan is paid off since the lender has first rights to death benefits.
• You may not be able to successfully purchase life insurance if you are older or in poor health.
• If you are using a permanent form of life insurance as collateral, there may be an impact on your ability to use the policy's cash value during the life of the loan. If the loan balance and interest payments exceed the cash value, it can erode the policy's value over time.

What types of life insurance can I use as collateral for a loan?

You may use either of the main types of life insurance— term and permanent —for collateral assignment. If you are using term life insurance, you will need a policy with a term length that is at least as long as the term of the loan. In other words, if you have 20 years to pay off the loan, the term insurance you need must have a term of at least 20 years.

Subcategories of permanent life insurance, such as whole life , universal life and variable life, may also be used. Depending on lender requirements, you may be able to use an existing policy or could purchase a new one for the loan. A permanent policy with cash value may be especially appealing to a lender, considering the added benefit of the cash reserves they could access if necessary.

How do I take out a loan using a collateral assignment of life insurance?

If you already have enough life insurance to use for collateral assignment, your next step is to find a lender who is willing to work with you. If you don’t yet have life insurance, or you don’t have enough, consider the amount of coverage you need and apply for a policy . You may need to undergo a medical exam and fill out an application .

Once your policy has been approved, ask your insurance company or agent for a collateral assignment form, which you will complete and submit with your loan application papers. The form names your lender as an assignee of the policy—meaning that they have a stake in its benefits for as long as the loan exists. You will also name beneficiaries or a single beneficiary, who will receive whatever is left over from the death benefits after the loan is repaid.

Note that you will need to stay current on your life insurance premium payments while the collateral assignment is active. This will be stated in the loan agreement, and failure to do so could have serious repercussions.

Alternatives to life insurance as collateral

If you are considering a collateral assignment of life insurance, there are a few alternative funding options that might be worth exploring. Since many factors determine each option, working with a financial advisor may be the best way to find the ideal solution for your situation.

Unsecured loan

Depending on your situation, an unsecured loan may be more affordable than a secured loan with life insurance as collateral. This is more likely to be the case if you have good enough credit to qualify for a low-interest rate without having to offer any type of collateral. There are many different types of unsecured loans, including credit cards and personal loans.

Secured loan

In addition to life insurance, there are other items you can use as collateral for a secured loan . Your home, a car or a boat, for example, could be used if you have enough equity in them. Typically, secured loans are easier to qualify for than unsecured, since they are not as risky for the lender, and you are likely to find a lower interest rate than you would with an unsecured loan. The flip side, of course, is that if you default on the loan, the lender can take the asset that you used to secure it and sell it to recoup their losses.

Life insurance loan

Some permanent life insurance policies accumulate cash value over time that you can use in different ways. If you have such a policy, you may be able to partially withdraw the cash value or take a loan against your cash value. However, there are implications to using the cash value in your life insurance policy, so be sure to discuss this solution with a life insurance agent or your financial advisor before making a decision.

Home equity line of credit (HELOC)

A home equity line of credit (HELOC) is a more flexible way to access funds than a standard secured loan. While HELOCs carry the downside of risking your home as collateral, you retain more control over the amount you borrow. Instead of receiving one lump sum, you will have access to a line of credit that you can withdraw from as needed. You will only have to pay interest on the actual amount borrowed.

Frequently asked questions

What is the best life insurance company, what type of loans are collateral assignments usually associated with, what are other common forms of collateral, what are the two types of life insurance assignments.

Related Articles

What is collateral insurance and how does it work?

What does life insurance cover?

What is an irrevocable beneficiary?

Life insurance death benefits

Financial Tips, Guides & Know-Hows

Home > Finance > What Is An Assignee On A Life Insurance Policy?

What Is An Assignee On A Life Insurance Policy?

Published: October 14, 2023

Learn the role of an assignee on a life insurance policy and how it can impact your finances. Discover what it takes to become a finance-savvy assignee.

(Many of the links in this article redirect to a specific reviewed product. Your purchase of these products through affiliate links helps to generate commission for LiveWell, at no extra cost. Learn more )

Table of Contents

Introduction, definition of assignee, role of assignee in a life insurance policy, rights and responsibilities of an assignee, process of assigning a life insurance policy, benefits of assigning a life insurance policy, considerations before assigning a life insurance policy, potential challenges and risks for assignees.

Life insurance is a crucial financial tool that provides protection and financial security to individuals and their loved ones in case of unexpected events. While the primary purpose of life insurance is to provide a death benefit to beneficiaries, policy owners also have the flexibility to assign or transfer their policy rights to another person or entity. This is where an assignee comes into play.

An assignee on a life insurance policy refers to the individual or entity who is designated to receive the policy benefits or be the recipient of any policy changes. Assigning a life insurance policy can be a strategic move for policyholders who want to transfer ownership rights or allocate the proceeds to a specific person or organization.

In this article, we will delve deeper into the role of an assignee in a life insurance policy, their rights and responsibilities, as well as the process of assigning a policy. We will also explore the benefits and considerations involved in assigning a life insurance policy, along with potential challenges and risks that assignees may encounter.

Understanding the concept of assignees in life insurance policies is essential for policyholders who may be considering transferring their policy rights or for beneficiaries who need to comprehend the implications of an assigned policy. Without further ado, let’s dive into the details of assignees on a life insurance policy.

An assignee on a life insurance policy is an individual or entity that is designated to receive the policy benefits or take over the ownership rights and responsibilities. When a policyholder assigns their life insurance policy, they transfer their rights to the assignee, who then becomes the new owner of the policy.

The assignee can be a spouse, child, relative, friend, or even a business entity such as a trust or corporation. The assignee can be named at the time the policy is initially taken out, or the policyholder can choose to assign the policy at a later date. In some cases, a policyholder may assign their policy to a lender or creditor as collateral for a loan.

It is important to note that the assignee is distinct from the beneficiary. The beneficiary is the person or entity who receives the death benefit proceeds upon the death of the insured. While the assignee assumes ownership of the policy, they may or may not be the same person as the beneficiary.

Assigning a life insurance policy can be a way for policyholders to ensure that the intended recipient receives the policy benefits or to transfer the financial responsibility and management of the policy to someone else.

Now that we have established the definition of an assignee in a life insurance policy, let’s explore their role in more detail.

The assignee plays a significant role in a life insurance policy once they have been designated as the new owner. Their responsibilities and authority may vary depending on the terms of the policy and the specific agreement between the policyholder and the assignee. Here are some key roles an assignee may have:

• Policy Ownership: As the assignee, they become the legal owner of the life insurance policy. This means they have the rights to manage and make decisions regarding the policy, subject to any limitations or conditions outlined in the assignment agreement.
• Premium Payments: The assignee is generally responsible for paying the premiums to keep the policy in force. They may choose to use their own funds or utilize the policy’s cash value, if available, to cover the premiums.
• Beneficiary Designation: The assignee may have the authority to change the beneficiary designation if permitted by the policy terms. This gives them the ability to redirect the policy’s death benefit to another individual or entity.
• Policy Modifications: Depending on the specific agreement, the assignee may have the power to make changes to the policy, such as increasing or decreasing the coverage amount, adjusting the policy term, or adding additional riders.
• Access to Policy Information: As the new policy owner, the assignee has the right to access and review the policy information, including the policy terms, conditions, and any associated documents.
• Claims Processing: In the event of the insured’s death, the assignee is responsible for initiating the claims process and ensuring that the death benefit proceeds are disbursed to the designated beneficiary.

It’s important to note that the specific roles and authority of the assignee can vary based on the terms of the assignment agreement. It is essential for both the policyholder and the assignee to have a clear understanding of their respective roles and responsibilities to avoid any confusion or disputes in the future.

Now that we have examined the role of an assignee in a life insurance policy, let’s explore the rights and responsibilities they have in more detail.

When an individual or entity becomes the assignee of a life insurance policy, they acquire certain rights and responsibilities associated with the policy. These rights and responsibilities can vary depending on the terms of the assignment agreement and the specific provisions of the policy. Let’s take a closer look at the rights and responsibilities of an assignee:

Rights of an Assignee:

• Ownership Rights: As the assignee, they have the right to the policy benefits and any cash value that has accumulated. They can make decisions regarding the policy, such as changing the beneficiary, modifying coverage, or accessing policy information.
• Premium Payments: The assignee has the right to receive premium payments from the policyholder, which they can use to keep the policy in force. They may also have the right to access the policy’s cash value, if available.
• Policy Modifications: Depending on the terms of the assignment agreement, the assignee may have the right to make changes to the policy, such as adjusting the coverage amount, policy term, or adding additional riders.
• Access to Policy Information: The assignee has the right to access and review the policy information, including the terms, conditions, and any associated documents. This allows them to stay informed about the policy’s provisions and make informed decisions.
• Claims Processing: In the event of the insured’s death, the assignee has the right to initiate the claims process and receive the death benefit proceeds. They are responsible for disbursing the proceeds to the designated beneficiary, if applicable.

Responsibilities of an Assignee:

• Premium Payments: As the assignee, they are responsible for making premium payments to keep the policy in force. This ensures that the policy remains active and the coverage continues.
• Policy Management: The assignee has the responsibility to manage and maintain the policy. This includes reviewing the policy regularly, staying informed about any changes in the terms and conditions, and making decisions that align with the policyholder’s intentions.
• Beneficiary Designation: If authorized by the assignment agreement, the assignee may have the responsibility to change the beneficiary designation if necessary. This involves ensuring that the intended recipient of the death benefit is correctly designated.
• Communication: The assignee has the responsibility to maintain open communication with the policyholder, beneficiaries, and any other parties involved. This helps in addressing any questions, concerns, or changes that may arise regarding the policy.

It’s important for both the assignee and the policyholder to have a clear understanding of these rights and responsibilities to ensure a smooth and effective management of the policy. Now that we have explored the rights and responsibilities of an assignee, let’s move on to understand the process of assigning a life insurance policy.

The process of assigning a life insurance policy involves transferring the ownership rights and control of the policy from the policyholder to the assignee. While the specific steps may vary based on the insurance company and policy terms, the general process typically includes the following:

• Review Policy Terms: The policyholder should carefully review the terms and conditions of their life insurance policy to understand any limitations or restrictions on assigning the policy.
• Choose an Assignee: The policyholder selects an individual or entity to be the assignee. This can be a family member, friend, trust, or even a business entity. It is essential to consider the long-term goals and intentions when choosing an assignee.
• Obtain Consent: The policyholder must obtain the consent of the proposed assignee to ensure they are willing to assume the responsibilities and obligations associated with the policy.
• Prepare Assignment Agreement: The policyholder and the assignee should work together to prepare an assignment agreement. This is a legal document that outlines the terms of the assignment, including the assignee’s rights, responsibilities, and any potential compensation or considerations involved.
• Notify the Insurance Company: The policyholder must contact their insurance company to inform them of the intention to assign the policy. The insurance company may require specific forms to be filled out, along with a copy of the assignment agreement.
• Insurance Company Approval: The insurance company will review the assignment request and the assignment agreement to ensure they comply with their policies and regulations. Once approved, they will update their records to reflect the new assignee.
• Update Beneficiary Designation: If the assignee is different from the original beneficiary, the policyholder may need to update the beneficiary designation to ensure that the intended recipient receives the death benefit.

It is crucial for both the policyholder and the assignee to consult with legal and financial professionals to ensure that the assignment process is conducted properly, adhering to any legal requirements and optimizing the financial outcomes for all parties involved.

Now that we have discussed the process of assigning a life insurance policy, let’s move on to explore the benefits of assigning a life insurance policy.

Assigning a life insurance policy can offer several benefits for both the policyholder and the assignee. Here are some key advantages of assigning a life insurance policy:

• Control and Flexibility: Assigning a life insurance policy allows the policyholder to have control over who will manage and benefit from the policy. It provides flexibility to designate a specific person or entity to take over the ownership rights and responsibilities.
• Estate Planning: Assigning a life insurance policy can be an effective estate planning strategy. It allows the policyholder to transfer assets outside of their estate, which may help in minimizing estate taxes and ensuring a smooth transfer of wealth to the intended recipients.
• Creditor Protection: By assigning a life insurance policy to a trust or business entity, the policy cash value and death benefit may be protected from potential creditors. This provides an added layer of financial security for the assignee and the intended beneficiaries.
• Financial Assistance: Assigning a life insurance policy can be beneficial in scenarios where the assignee needs financial assistance. For example, if the assignee is facing financial hardship or requires funds for a specific purpose, they may be able to access the policy’s cash value or even borrow against the policy.
• Charitable Giving: Assigning a life insurance policy to a charitable organization can be a meaningful way to support a favorite cause. It allows the policyholder to make a significant charitable contribution, and the assignee, in this case, would be responsible for managing the policy and ensuring that the proceeds benefit the designated charity.

It’s important to note that the benefits of assigning a life insurance policy can vary depending on the specific circumstances and goals of the policyholder. Therefore, it is advisable to consult with financial advisors, estate planning professionals, and insurance experts to assess the suitability of assigning a policy and to maximize the potential benefits.

Now that we have explored the benefits of assigning a life insurance policy, let’s move on to discuss some considerations before making the decision to assign a policy.

Before deciding to assign a life insurance policy, it is crucial to carefully consider a few key factors. These considerations will help ensure that the decision aligns with your financial goals and meets your specific needs. Here are some important points to ponder:

• Impact on Beneficiaries: Assigning a life insurance policy may have implications for the intended beneficiaries. It is essential to consider their needs and financial security before assigning the policy to someone else or an entity. Make sure to have open conversations with the beneficiaries to discuss any changes in the policy ownership and how it may impact them.
• Future Financial Needs: Assess your own future financial needs before assigning a life insurance policy. Life circumstances can change, and it is crucial to determine if the policy’s cash value or death benefit might be required for your own financial stability or long-term goals. Balancing immediate financial needs with the desire to assign the policy is important.
• Trustworthiness of the Assignee: Consider the trustworthiness and reliability of the proposed assignee. Assigning a life insurance policy involves transferring ownership rights and responsibilities, so it is crucial to choose someone who will effectively manage the policy and fulfill the agreed-upon obligations. Conduct thorough due diligence and consider seeking legal advice to ensure the assignee is the right choice.
• Tax Implications: Assigning a life insurance policy may have tax implications. Consult with tax professionals to understand any potential tax consequences of the assignment, such as gift tax or estate tax considerations. Proper planning and knowledge of tax laws will help mitigate any unexpected tax liabilities.
• Insurance Company Policy: Review the terms and conditions of your life insurance policy regarding assignments. Some policies may have restrictions or limitations on assigning a policy, and it’s important to understand these provisions. Contact your insurance company directly to clarify any concerns or questions related to the assignment process.
• Legal Considerations: Assigning a life insurance policy involves legal documentation and agreements. It is advisable to consult with legal professionals who specialize in insurance and estate planning to ensure that the assignment is conducted in compliance with applicable laws and meets your specific needs.

Considering these factors will help you make an informed decision about whether assigning a life insurance policy is the right choice for you. Assess your individual situation, speak with professionals, and review your long-term goals to determine if assigning the policy aligns with your overall financial plan.

Now that we have explored the considerations before assigning a life insurance policy, let’s discuss some potential challenges and risks for assignees.

While assigning a life insurance policy can have its benefits, there are also potential challenges and risks that assignees should be aware of. Understanding these risks will help you make informed decisions and take necessary precautions. Here are some potential challenges and risks for assignees:

• Financial Responsibility: As the assignee, you become responsible for paying the policy premiums to keep the coverage in force. Failure to pay the premiums can result in the policy lapsing, causing loss of coverage and potential loss of the policy’s cash value.
• Potential Conflict: Assigning a life insurance policy may lead to conflicts, especially if the policyholder has multiple beneficiaries or if the assigned policy conflicts with other estate planning arrangements. It is important to communicate and coordinate with all involved parties to minimize potential disputes.
• Changing Circumstances: Life circumstances can change, and the assigned policy may no longer align with the assignee’s needs or financial goals. Review the policy periodically to ensure it still meets your objectives. If necessary, consult with professionals to explore options for policy modifications or changes.
• Loss of Control: By assigning a policy, you relinquish control over certain aspects of the policy. The assignee may need to consult the policyholder or beneficiaries before making any changes or important decisions. This loss of control should be carefully considered before proceeding with the assignment.
• Insurance Company Approval: The insurance company typically has the final say in approving the assignment. They will review and confirm the assignment agreement to ensure compliance with their policies. If the assignment is not approved, it can impede the intended transfer of ownership.
• Tax Implications: Assigning a life insurance policy may have tax consequences for the assignee, such as potential income tax on the policy’s cash value or estate tax implications. Consult with tax professionals before finalizing the assignment to fully understand these potential tax implications.

It is crucial for assignees to carefully weigh these challenges and risks against the potential benefits before accepting the assignment of a life insurance policy. Be proactive in communicating with the policyholder and beneficiaries, stay informed about policy details, and seek professional guidance to navigate any potential challenges or risks.

Now that we have discussed the potential challenges and risks for assignees, let’s wrap up our article.

Assigning a life insurance policy can be a strategic financial move that offers flexibility and control over the policy’s ownership and benefits. By designating an assignee, individuals can ensure that the policy proceeds are directed to the intended recipient or utilize the expertise of an entity to manage the policy. However, before proceeding with an assignment, it is important to carefully consider various factors.

Understanding the role, rights, and responsibilities of an assignee is vital to ensure a smooth transition and effective management of the policy. The assignee assumes ownership of the policy, enjoying benefits such as decision-making authority and control over premiums. They also have responsibilities, including making premium payments, managing the policy, and initiating claims if the insured passes away.

The process of assigning a life insurance policy involves reviewing policy terms, choosing an assignee, obtaining consent, preparing an assignment agreement, and notifying the insurance company. It is crucial to review the policy specifics and consult legal and financial professionals to ensure compliance with regulations and optimize financial outcomes.

Assigning a life insurance policy offers numerous benefits, such as control, estate planning opportunities, creditor protection, and financial assistance. However, there are considerations to keep in mind, including the impact on beneficiaries, future financial needs, and tax implications.

Assignees may face potential challenges, such as financial responsibility, conflicts of interest, changing circumstances, loss of control, and insurance company approval. These risks should be carefully assessed, and open communication with the policyholder and beneficiaries is essential to minimize disputes and ensure a smooth transition.

In conclusion, assigning a life insurance policy requires thoughtful deliberation and consultation with professionals. Assessing your financial goals, considering the needs of beneficiaries, and understanding the potential risks will help make an informed decision. Assigning a life insurance policy can provide peace of mind, but careful consideration and planning are essential to ensure the assigned policy aligns with your long-term financial goals.

Our Review on The Credit One Credit Card

20 Quick Tips To Saving Your Way To A Million Dollars

How Much Is Dupixent With Insurance?

What Is The FHA Funding Fee

Latest articles.

Understanding XRP’s Role in the Future of Money Transfers

Written By:

Navigating Post-Accident Challenges with Automobile Accident Lawyers

Navigating Disability Benefits Denial in Philadelphia: How a Disability Lawyer Can Help

Preparing for the Unexpected: Building a Robust Insurance Strategy for Your Business

Custom Marketplace Development: Creating Unique Online Shopping Experiences

Related post.

By:  •  Finance

Please accept our Privacy Policy.

We uses cookies to improve your experience and to show you personalized ads. Please review our privacy policy by clicking here .

• https://livewell.com/finance/what-is-an-assignee-on-a-life-insurance-policy/

• Life Insurance Quotes
• Whole Life Insurance
• Term Life Insurance
• Insurance Calculator
• Insurance Guide
• Insurance FAQ

Get Free Life Insurance Quotes

Or call 1-844-578-0620

What is an Assignee on a Life Insurance Policy?

When people take out a life insurance policy, it’s typically a step taken to prepare your loved ones for life after you pass away. What you may not know is that insurance policies are owned entities, which means they can be used as collateral for a loan or even be sold to offer money to you when you’re in a tough spot. There are also different methods available to do this, which we’ll explain in this article.

An individual who is taking out insurance will have many choices, such as whether you prefer to purchase whole life insurance or term life insurance . You also have choices when it comes to using your policy to leverage money that has already been invested in it.

Part of that is understanding the difference between a collateral assignment and an absolute assignment, so you can be sure to choose the solution that works best with your financial needs. The other part of it involves knowing the most important terms related to an assignment so that you go in with the knowledge you need.

Collateral Assignment of Life Insurance

If you have ever taken out a standard personal loan, a collateral assignment of life insurance has a lot of similarities to that process. The collateral for the loan is the life insurance policy and an organization or individual who pays out the loan is the assignee . They are also the ones who take over the policy on a conditional basis.

One important thing to know is that the assignee cannot resell the policy, make use of its cash value, or make changes to it. The assignee may only take the money for the death benefit if you, as the policyholder, default on the loan.

In the typical situation, if the collateral assignment is standing at your death, the assignee will let the insurance company know about the debt remaining, including interest. They will then be provided with that amount. If there are extra benefits, those will go to your beneficiary listed in the policy.

Absolute Assignment of Life Insurance

Another way to acquire a loan using life insurance is through an absolute assignment. This differs from collateral assignment since instead of using the loan as collateral, you are signing the full policy over to a person or entity. This person or business is considered the assignee, while the person who is selling the policy is the assignor.

The individual who buys the insurance policy gains ownership of the policy. This makes them responsible for the premiums and lets them make changes or choose different beneficiaries .

Each absolute assignment will have different terms based on the contract that is signed. For instance, it might explain that the assignor is transferring all title, rights, and interest in the policy to the assignee. Depending on the insurance company, an ownership clause may be used to make the transfer itself.

Understanding Policy Provisions

To ensure the assignee is protected, the insurance company needs to be notified that an assignment is in place. If the company doesn’t have notice of the assignment, the process might be paid to a beneficiary or a different assignee. This can be an issue since the insurance company will not pay the amount out again to another person.

Many life insurance policies come with policy provisions related to assignments. The most common include:

• The assignment is subject to all indebtedness related to the insurance company regarding the policy.
• The assignment only becomes binding when the original or duplicate is filed at the insurance company’s home office.
• The insurance provider has no responsibility for the sufficiency, effect, or the validity of the assignment.

Because of these provisions, it’s crucial to ensure that you make the assignment correctly. This applies whether it is an absolute assignment or a collateral assignment. The best thing you can do to avoid problems is to speak with an experienced insurance professional who can guide you to the best solution for your needs.

Comparing Assignments Among Life Insurance Policies

If you are in a situation where you need money and it needs to happen quickly, ask yourself whether your cash value in your life insurance policy could help you out. After you decide the answer to that, make sure that you consider the larger picture.

Going with an absolute assignment approach may be able to offer you a large sum of money at one time. However, you also need to realize that your family and loved ones will no longer have the protection that was provided by the policy. If this is a policy that you have been dutifully paying into for decades, losing all the value is something you need to decide whether you’re ready for.

On the other hand, a collateral assignment doesn’t whisk away the policy in its entirety. You can get control of your policy back as soon as you resolve your financial problem and pay back the loan. A collateral assignment is one of the most common ways to borrow from a life insurance policy to use the cash value on necessities.

Collateral assignments let you regain the benefits associated with a long-term life insurance policy at some point in the future. Since most people are familiar with paying off student loans, auto loans, and mortgages, this agreement is similar. Making all of the payments on time can help with both financial concerns in the present as well as creating long-term financial success.

Selecting Between Life Insurance Assignment Options

Every person is unique and will be in a different situation when considering a life insurance assignment. For one person, choosing a collateral assignment might be the right choice since the individual wants the life insurance benefits back after paying off the loan. Someone else may not be interested in those benefits and need a larger amount of money, which an absolute assignment can offer.

You’ll want to consider all your options before borrowing through your life insurance , whether that involves an assignment or another type of loan. Be aware of all of your options and make sure your choice is right for the present and your future financial situation.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Please fill all the fields below (your email won't be displaied on the site).

required , will not be published

Help protect yourself with Life Ant

Automated page speed optimizations for fast site performance

What Is a Life Insurance Assignment?

More articles.

•   1. What Is the Collateral Assignment of a Life Insurance Policy?
•   2. What Is the Assignment of Insurance Benefits?
•   3. Absolute Assignment of Life Insurance Policies

Although the basic element of a life insurance policy is financial security protection in the event of a premature death, the variety of products available in the marketplace provides you with many financial planning options. A life insurance assignment is a document that allows you to transfer the ownership rights of your policy to a third party, transferring to that third party all rights of ownership under your policy, including the rights to make decisions regarding coverage, beneficiary and investment options. The two kinds of life insurance assignments are conditional and absolute.

Conditional Assignment

With a conditional assignment, although you transfer your life insurance policy’s ownership rights to another party, the assignment stipulates that if a certain specified event occurs, the assignment can be suspended or revoked in whole or in part. The event in question cannot be something that you can cause to happen. If you assigned your life insurance policy to a business partner, for example, with the explicit agreement that on the death of that business partner the assignment is revoked, that assignment is deemed conditional.

Absolute Assignment

When you make an absolute assignment, the rights, title and interest in the life insurance policy pass on to another party without the possibility of reversal. The assignment provides security to the assignee in that you can no longer make decisions regarding the policy that would jeopardize it, such as taking out a policy loan or withdrawing cash values.

Secured Loan

If you own a business, and you wish to take out a loan for your business, the lender may require you to purchase life insurance on your own life as security for the loan. Initially you make the request for the insurance. Once the policy is approved and issued, you make an assignment to the bank. The bank now controls the decisions and can make changes to the policy, including naming itself as beneficiary.

Collateral Loan

If you own a life insurance policy with cash values, you might wish to access those cash values to increase your income flow. Withdrawals from life insurance policy cash values can result in taxes due and might reduce your death benefit. An alternative is to assign the life insurance policy to a lender in exchange for a line of credit or regular loan payments. These loans are generally not taxable, and you can typically borrow up to a stated maximum percentage of the cash value. Since the policy is assigned to the bank, your failure to pay the premiums on the policy will cause the bank to call the loan, cancel the insurance policy and use the cash values as payment of the loan. If you maintain the policy in force until your death, the bank is generally the beneficiary of the tax-free policy proceeds up to and including the outstanding amount of the loan, with any remaining policy proceeds paid tax free to your named beneficiary.

• AXA Life: Know Your Insurance

Philippe Lanctot started writing for business trade publications in 1990. He has contributed copy for the "Canadian Insurance Journal" and has been the co-author of text for life insurance company marketing guides. He holds a Bachelor of Science in mathematics from the University of Montreal with a minor in English.

Related Articles

What is the collateral assignment of a life insurance policy, what is the assignment of insurance benefits, absolute assignment of life insurance policies, is mortgage insurance better than life insurance to pay off a mortgage upon death, tapping the cash in life insurance, how does renewing a loan work, tax on withdrawal from life insurance, is life insurance taxed at payout, boat financing tips for consumers, how long can co-signers stay on a mortgage loan, cancelling whole life insurance, how much can i borrow against cash value.

Zacks Research is Reported On:

Zacks Investment Research

is an A+ Rated BBB

Accredited Business.

Copyright © 2024 Zacks Investment Research

At the center of everything we do is a strong commitment to independent research and sharing its profitable discoveries with investors. This dedication to giving investors a trading advantage led to the creation of our proven Zacks Rank stock-rating system. Since 1986 it has nearly tripled the S&P 500 with an average gain of +26% per year. These returns cover a period from 1986-2011 and were examined and attested by Baker Tilly, an independent accounting firm.

Visit performance for information about the performance numbers displayed above.

NYSE and AMEX data is at least 20 minutes delayed. NASDAQ data is at least 15 minutes delayed.

• MyNewMarkets.com
• Claims Journal
• Insurance Journal TV
• Academy of Insurance
• Carrier Management

Featured Stories

• Travelers CEO on Q1: ‘We’re Firing On All Cylinders’
• USAA to Lay Off 220 Employees

Current Magazine

• Read Online

Post-Loss Assignments of Claims Under Insurance Policies

In the settlement of lawsuits involving insured claims, it is not uncommon that one condition of the settlement is that the defendant assign his or her claims under all applicable insurance policies to the party that filed suit.

Indeed, it is frequently the case that the defendant, particularly when the defendant is an individual, has a limited ability to pay a judgment and insurance coverage offers the best opportunity for a recovery by the suing party. Usually, such settlements are made without any serious thought being given to whether the defendant’s claim against its insurer is assignable; the assumption being that it is assignable.

However, insurance policies generally have anti-assignment clauses which prohibit the assignment of the policy, or an interest in the policy, without the insurer’s consent. These clauses come into play in determining the validity or enforceability of the assignment of a claim under an insurance policy and should be considered when such an assignment is part of a settlement.

When considering the enforceability of anti-assignment clauses in insurance policies, the courts generally draw a distinction between an assignment made prior to the occurrence of a covered loss (a “pre-loss” assignment) and an assignment made after the occurrence of a covered loss (a “post-loss” assignment).

In analyzing pre-loss assignments, the courts recognize that requiring an insurer to provide coverage to an assignee of its policy prior to the occurrence of a covered loss would place the insurer in the position of covering a party with whom it had not contracted nor been allowed to properly underwrite to assess the risks posed by that potential insured, and, accordingly, determine the appropriate premium to charge for the risks being undertaken or choose to decline coverage.

Post-loss assignments, on the other hand, take place after the insurer’s obligations under its policy have become fixed by the occurrence of a covered loss, thus the risk factors applicable to the assignee are irrelevant with regard to the covered loss in question. For these reasons, the majority of the courts enforce anti-assignment clauses to prohibit or restrict pre-loss assignments, but refuse to enforce anti-assignment clauses to prohibit or restrict post-loss assignments.

Katrina Cases

The Louisiana Supreme Court, which had not previously addressed the enforceability of anti-assignment clauses for post-loss assignments, was recently confronted with this issue in the In re: Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation, litigation involving consolidated cases arising out of Hurricane Katrina. The issue arose as a result of a lawsuit brought by the State of Louisiana as the assignee of claims under numerous insurance policies as part of the “Road Home” Program. The Road Home Program was set up following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita to distribute federal funds to homeowners suffering damage from the hurricanes. In return for receiving a grant of up to $150,000, homeowners were required to execute a Limited Subrogation/Assignment agreement, which provided in pertinent part:

Pursuant to these Limited Subrogation/Assignments, the State of Louisiana brought suit against more than 200 insurance companies to recover funds dispensed under the Road Home Program. The suit was removed to Federal Court under the Class Action Fairness Act and the insurers filed motions to dismiss, arguing that the assignments to the State of Louisiana were invalid under the anti-assignment clauses in the homeowner policies at issue.

On appeal, the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals certified the following question to the Louisiana Supreme Court: “Does an anti-assignment clause in a homeowner’s insurance policy, which by its plain terms purports to bar any assignment of the policy or an interest therein without the insurer’s consent, bar an insured’s post-loss assignment of the insured’s claims under the policy when such an assignment transfers contractual obligations, not just the right to money due?”

In answering this question, the Louisiana Supreme Court began by noting that, as a general matter, contractual rights are assignable unless the law, the contract terms or the nature of the contract preclude assignment. Specific to the certified question, Louisiana Civil Code article 2653 provides that a right “cannot be assigned when the contract from which it arises prohibits the assignment of that right.” The Louisiana Supreme Court observed that the language of article 2653 is broad and, on its face, applies to all assignments, including post-loss assignments of insurance claims. The Court, therefore, construed the issue confronting it as whether Louisiana public policy would enforce an anti-assignment clause to preclude post-loss assignments of claims under insurance policies.

In addressing the public policy question, the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized the distinction between pre-loss assignments and post-loss assignments discussed by courts from other states and noted that the prevailing view was that anti-assignment clauses were invalid and/or unenforceable when applied to post-loss assignments. Notwithstanding this weight of authority, the Louisiana Supreme Court stated:

“[W]hile the Louisiana legislature has clearly indicated an intent to allow parties freedom to assign contractual rights, by enacting La. C.C. art. 2653, it has also clearly indicated an intent to allow parties freedom to contractually prohibit assignment of rights. We recognize the vast amount of national jurisprudence distinguishing between pre-loss and post-loss assignments and rejecting restrictions on post-loss assignments, however we find no public policy in Louisiana favoring assignability of claims over freedom of contract.”

Thus, Court refused to invalidate the enforceability of the anti-assignment clauses to the post-loss assignments before it based on public policy, adding that public policy determinations are better suited to the legislature.

Nonetheless, after having recognized the general enforceability of anti-assignment clauses to post-loss assignments, the Court immediately placed limits on when those clauses would be applicable, stating that to be applicable, they “must clearly and unambiguously express that the non-assignment clause applies to post-loss assignments.” The Court refused “to formulate a test consisting of specific terms or words,” which would satisfy this condition and remanded the case to the federal courts to determine whether the individual anti-assignment clauses in the various policies were sufficiently clear and explicit to be enforced with respect to post-loss assignments at issue.

A Broad Application

It should be noted that the Court’s opinion appears to apply broadly to all post-loss assignments irrespective of what specific rights are being assigned, despite the fact that the certified question was narrower and asked only about the applicability of a post-loss assignment where the assignment “transfers contractual obligations, not just the right to money due.”

In a footnote at the beginning of its opinion, the Louisiana Supreme Court observed that in certifying the question to it, the Fifth Circuit “disclaimed any intent” that the Court “confine its reply to the precise form or scope of the legal questions certified.” The footnote indicates that the Court’s opinion was not intended to be limited to only those post-loss assignments involving the assignment of contractual obligations.

Louisiana has departed from the majority view in holding that as a matter of general law, anti-assignment clauses are not inherently void with regard to post-loss assignments. However, it may be that in practical application, the results of individual cases may well be consistent with the majority rule of not enforcing anti-assignment clauses with regard to post-loss assignments because Louisiana courts may be reluctant to find that the anti-assignment clauses are sufficiently “clear and explicit” unless they specifically state that they apply to post-loss assignments, notwithstanding the Louisiana Supreme Court’s unwillingness to “formulate a test consisting of specific terms or words.”

Topics Lawsuits Carriers Profit Loss Claims Louisiana Hurricane Homeowners

Was this article valuable?

Thank you! Please tell us what we can do to improve this article.

Thank you! % of people found this article valuable. Please tell us what you liked about it.

Here are more articles you may enjoy.

Written By Robert Redfearn, Jr.

From this issue.

Excess, Surplus & Specialty Markets Directory Vol. II – The Industry’s Leading Coverage Placement Directory

Interested in carriers .

Get automatic alerts for this topic.

• Categories: Legal Beat
• Have a hot lead? Email us at [email protected]

Insurance Jobs

• Auto Adverse Subrogation Claim Representative Trainee - Franklin, TN
• Summer Intern - Fort Lee, NJ
• Commercial Underwriter-Account Executive, Business Center - Saint Paul, MN
• Enrollment Specialist – Health Insurance Carrier – REMOTE - Remote
• Early Careers: Health and Benefits Internship – Southeast – Summer 2024 - Arlington, VA

• A Look at the Liquor Liability Landscape
• How to Sell Yacht Insurance Amidst a Rising Tide
• Squeezed from All Sides: Restaurants Pressured by Labor, Food, Insurance Costs
• Extreme Weather, Cyber Risks Top Concerns When Insuring Farms
• 3 Areas for Agents to Focus Growth Efforts in 2024 As the Hard Market Continues

• UnitedHealth Data Leak May Affect 'Substantial' Swath of U.S.
• US Supreme Court Examines Firings of Pro-Union Starbucks Workers
• Dubai Floods Expose Weaknesses to a Rapidly Changing Climate
• Tesco's 'Fire and Rehire' Policy Gets UK Top Court Scrutiny
• FTC Issues Worker Non-Compete Ban as Chamber Lawsuit Looms

• April 25 Getting Back to Work: Workers' Comp and the Social Determinants of Health
• May 2 Rules of Engagement in Selling
• May 9 Cannabis and the Homeowners' Policy
• May 16 Business Income Limits and Coinsurance

Assignment of Life Insurance Policy

The person who assigns the policy, i.e. transfers the rights, is called the Assignor and the one to whom the policy has been assigned, i.e. the person to whom the policy rights have been transferred is called the Assignee.

Assignment of a Life Insurance Policy simply means transfer of rights from one person to another. The policyholder can transfer the rights of his insurance policy to another for various reasons and this process is called Assignment.

The person who assigns the policy, i.e. transfers the rights, is called the Assignor and the one to whom the policy has been assigned, i.e. the person to whom the policy rights have been transferred is called the Assignee. Once the rights have been transferred to the Assignee, the rights of the Assignor stands cancelled and the Assignee becomes the owner of the policy.

here are 2 types of Assignment:

• Absolute Assignment – This means complete Transfer of Rights from the Assignor to the Assignee, without any further conditions applicable.
• Conditional Assignment – This means that the Transfer of Rights will happen from the Assignor to the Assignee subject to certain conditions. If the conditions are fulfilled then only the Policy will get transferred from the Assignor to the Assignee.

Let’s take an example:

Rahul owns 2 Life Insurance policies of value Rs 2 lakhs and Rs 5 lakhs respectively. He would like to gift one policy of Rs 2 lakhs to his best friend Ajay. In that case, he would like to absolutely assign the policy in his name such that the death or maturity proceeds are directly paid to him. Thus, after the assignment, Ajay becomes the absolute owner of the policy. If he wishes, he may again transfer it to someone else for any other reason. This type of Assignment is called Absolute Assignment.

Now, Rahul needed to take a loan for Rs 5 lakhs. So, he thought of doing so against the other policy that he owned for Rs 5 lakhs. To take a loan from ABC bank, he needed to conditionally assign the policy to that Bank and then the bank would be able to pay out the loan money to him. If Rahul failed to repay the loan, then the bank would surrender the policy and get their money back.

Once Rahul’s loan is completely repaid, then the policy would again come back to him. In case, Rahul died before completely repaying the loan, then also the bank can surrender the policy to get their money back. This type of Assignment is called Conditional Assignment.

Sachin Telawane is a Content Manager and writes on various aspects of the Insurance industry. His enlightening insights on the insurance industry has guided the readers to make informed decisions in the course of purchasing insurance plans.

How Does Your Insurance Policy’s “Assignment of Benefits” Clause Affect You?

When homeowners suffer a property loss, one of the first things they do – even before they know the amount of coverage they will receive from their insurer – is call a contractor. The contractor looks at the damage, and estimates the likely cost of repairing the property. Maybe that estimate is greater than the coverage amount the homeowner expects the insurance company to pay out.

In this instance, the contractor will sometimes suggest that the homeowner enter into an “assignment of benefits” (AOB) arrangement. Under this side contract, the contractor agrees to accept as payment whatever the insurance company pays for the insured’s property loss claim.

Such AOB deals can be a major problem.

For one thing, most contractors know very little about insurance coverages and the art of negotiating optimal coverage payouts. The insurance company may initially offer $60K, for example, in a situation where an experienced public adjuster could have secured almost twice that amount. The contractor might take the $60K, and then discover that amount isn’t enough to get the repair job done properly. The contractor then must skimp and cut corners, resulting in a shoddy repair job for the unsuspecting homeowner.

At common law, insureds were prohibited from assigning their insurance policy benefits and other underlying rights. State legislatures, however, have allowed AOB, and many state courts will permit the assignment of insurance policies.

The problems stemming from AOB have led to a mountain of litigation and debates about whether it should be allowed at all. Insurance carriers are happy to allow AOB, because contractors present an easy mark and often accept low-ball claim offers. The contractors, meanwhile, are serving two masters – handling the insured’s claim, as well as taking money to do repairs. That’s exactly why the National Association of Public Insurance Adjusters (NAPIA) doesn’t allow contractors to be PAs and do this type of work.

We recently spoke with Brian Goodman, General Counsel of NAPIA, who calls the practice of AOB “ripe with the possibility of harming consumers and making it so the insured never gets properly indemnified.”  We agree.

NAPIA is working with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) to eradicate the practice of AOB. There is some resistance because of an unwillingness to infringe on an individual’s right to contract with somebody. But, in our view, any use of AOB really harms consumers.

Diane Swerling

Related posts.

Trending News

Related Practices & Jurisdictions

• Insurance Reinsurance & Surety
• Litigation / Trial Practice
• 7th Circuit (incl. bankruptcy)

Insurance disputes sometimes arise out of transactions.  Those of you who are involved in transactions, including transactions arising out of insolvencies, might be interested in a cautionary tale from a recent Illinois appellate court case addressing the assignment of insurance policies as part of an asset purchase agreement.  This drafting lesson may help avoid future litigation.

In  The Premcor Refining Group Inc. v. ACE Insurance Company of Illinois , No. 5-18-0210, 2019 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1539 (Aug. 12, 2019), the purchaser of a refinery from a Chapter 11 debtor sought to obtain the benefits of all the insurance policies issued to the seller and its predecessors by various insurance companies to cover various environmental contamination lawsuits and proceedings.  The refinery was sold via an asset purchase agreement.  The question before the court was whether there was a valid assignment of all the insurance policies from seller to purchaser.

The court concluded that there was no valid assignment of all in the insurance policies in the asset purchase agreement, just the potential assignment of only those policies listed on a particular schedule.  The case was remanded to allow the purchaser to amend its complaint to address only those insurance policies scheduled.

The asset purchase agreement, in the section describing the assets purchased, provided that the purchaser would acquire, among other things, all right, title and interest of the seller in “all proceeds payable under any insurance policy covering the Purchased Assets by reason of any and all occurrences occurring prior to the Closings Date.”  In the section entitled Insurance, the agreement provided that any rights that the seller may have against their insurers with respect to the Purchased Assets shall at closing be assigned to the purchaser.

The court held that neither provision constituted a valid assignment of the rights of the seller under the relevant insurance policies.  The court pointed out that these sections of the asset purchase agreement did not mention liability insurance rights, but evidenced a promise to convey to the purchaser any proceeds from pending claims covering the purchased assets. The court opined that where a purported assignment does not specifically identify an insurance policy, and does not mention liability coverage at all, the subject of the assignment is not described with sufficient particularity to be a valid assignment of all the assignor’s rights under all of its past liability insurance policies.

The court referenced another case where an assignment was found valid by using language that clearly referenced the subject of the assigned liability policies.  In that case,  Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. Commerce & Industry Insurance Co. , 2011 Ill. App. (1st) 093084 (Dec. 12, 2011), the purchase agreement sufficiently stated what was assigned:

“The benefits, including all rights to defense and indemnity coverage, under any and all policies of liability insurance issued to [Seller] prior to the closing Date . . . with respect to insurance coverage for accidents, occurrences, claims, suits, actions or proceedings arising from the operations, activities, or conduct of the [Seller’s] Business prior to the Closing Date; provided, however, that such benefits shall transfer to [Buyer] to the extent liabilities for such accidents, occurrences, claims, suits, actions, or proceedings are threatened against, transferred to, or otherwise imposed upon [Buyer].”

To avoid litigation over assignment of insurance policies in a corporate transaction requires that if the intent is to assign existing insurance coverage from seller to buyer, the assignment clauses in the purchase agreement must be crystal clear that the policies—not just the proceeds from the polices—are being assigned.  And to make it crystal clear specificity is necessary as to the policies (on a schedule) and what those policies are being assigned to cover should be made clear.

Current Legal Analysis

More from squire patton boggs (us) llp, upcoming legal education events.

Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins

• Assignments In Insurance Law

Introduction

• 1.1 Nature Of Insurance Policies

1.2 Assignment

• 2. Application Of English Law

2.1 Generally

• 2.2 Policies Of Assurance Act 1867

2.3 Marine Insurance Act 1906

3. marine insurance, 4. property insurance, 5. motor insurance, 6. life insurance, 6.1 legal assignment, 6.2 equitable assignment, 6.3 incomplete assignment, 6.4 priorities.

• 7.1 Assignment Of Insurance Policies
• 7.2 Assignment Of The Proceeds Of Insurance Policies
• 7.3 Assignment Of The Subject Matter Of Insurance Policies
• 7.4 Assignment By Operation Of Law

7.5 Conditions Prohibiting Assignment

8. conclusion, assignments in insurance law.

The concept of assignments in insurance law takes on many forms - firstly due to the various branches of insurance law and secondly due to the various components in an insurance transaction that can be assigned. The format of this discussion, therefore, is reflective of this framework.

Assignments are first discussed in the context of the following branches of insurance law:

(i) marine insurance,

(ii) property insurance,

(iii) motor insurance, and

(iv) life insurance.

The next stage of this discussion focuses on what may be assigned in an insurance transaction and how such assignments are legally effected, namely, the assignment of:

(a) an insurance policy,

(b) the proceeds of an insurance policy, and

(c) the subject matter of an insurance policy.

1.1 Nature of Insurance Policies

A. A. Tarr, Kwai-Lian Liew & W. Holligan writes:

“The origins of insurance date back thousands of years. For example, a central feature of insurance, that of risk interference, was incorporated in commercial arrangements effected by the Babylonians, Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans. However, the infancy of the modern insurance contract is founded on the practices adopted by Italian merchants in the 14th century. These merchants fostered the development of marine insurance and were reluctant to accept the numerous and diverse risks associated with the mercantile adventure of transporting goods across the sea; an early policy entered into in 1385 insured a ship and cargo against loss arising ‘from Acts of God, of the sea, of fire, of jettison, of confiscation by princes or cities or any other person, of reprisal, mishap or any other impediment’. Merchants in their relations with one another tended to uniformity on commercial matters and this tendency led to the rapid dissemination if marine insurance practices to other countries, and, in particular, to the low countries, Spain and England.” [1]

Lord Hailsham of St. Marylebone writes:

“Non-marine insurance first made its appearance in the form of life and fire insurance, but until the middle of the nineteenth century these three [2] types of insurance comprised, in practice, substantially the whole range of insurance.”

The practice of taking insurance and property and later, lives, has a long and rich history. Unsatisfied with leaving the health and safety of property and lives to the capricious whims of fate alone, our ancestors have sought to ‘hedge their bets’ by entering into an insurance transaction.

John Lowry & Philip Rawlings writes:

“The aim of insurance is to shift risk from one person (the insured) to another (the insurers): the owner of a house enters into a fire policy under which an insurer, in exchange for a premium paid by the insured, agrees to pay for damage caused to the property by fire.” [3]

Professor K. S. N. Murthy & K. V. S. Sarma writes:

“The aim of all insurance is to protect the owner from a variety of risks which he anticipates.” [4]

John Birds and Norma J. Hird observe that:

“It is suggested that a contract of insurance is any contract whereby one party assumes the risk of an uncertain event, which is not within his control, happening at a future time, in which event the other party has an interest, and under which contract the first party is bound to pay money or provide its equivalent if the uncertain event occurs.” [5]

In Rayner v Preston [6] , Brett L.J. explained the nature of a contract of insurance in the following terms:

“Now, in my judgment, the subject-matter of the contract of insurance is money, and money only. The subject-matter of insurance is a different thing from the subject-matter of the contract of insurance. The subject-matter of insurance may be a house or other premises in a fire policy, or may be a ship or goods in a marine policy. These are the subject-matter of insurance, but the subject-matter of the contract is money, and money only. The only result of the policy, if an accident which is within the insurance happens, is a payment of money. It is true that under certain circumstances in a fire policy there may be an option to spend the money in rebuilding the premises, but that does not alter the fact that the only liability of the insurance company is to pay money. The contract, therefore, is a contract with regard to the payment of money, and it is a contract made between two persons, and two persons, only, as a contact.” [7]

Poh Chu Chai writes:

“A contract of insurance constitutes a highly personal contract and as a general rule, such a contract is generally not assignable.” [8]

The insurer fixes the premium after considering the particular risks associated with the property and handling of the property in the hands of the insured. As such, as a general rule, an insurance policy is not casually assignable to another party. Nevertheless, assignments are not an unheard of option in an insurance transaction.

Before embarking on the discovery of how assignments in insurance law can be legally effected, it may prove beneficial to consider the nature of what is meant by this phrase which takes centre stage in this discussion, an ‘assignment’.

R. C. Kohli explains:

“Transfer of interest from one to another is called assignment. In insurance also when rights and obligation under the contract are transferred from one to another, the same is called assignment of the policy. There can be another assignment in insurance which is assignment of benefits under the policies. Assignment of policy and assignment of benefits are quite distinct. Whereas in the former all the rights and obligations are transferred, in the latter only benefits (i.e. money due under the policy etc) are transferred. In insurance the assignment means assignment of rights under the contract. An assignee for all purposes becomes the owner of the policy and enjoys all rights thereunder. However, by assignment no change is made in the subject matter insured by the policy and it remains unaltered.” [9]

David Norwood and John P. Weir writes:

“There is no special form of assignment document, no magic words which must be used to create a valid and effective legal assignment. As was expressed in one case [10] : ‘[An assignment] ... may be addressed to the debtor. It may be couched in the language of command, It may be a courteous request. It may assume the form of mere permission. The language is immaterial if the meaning is clear.’

The only important point is that the instrument recording the assignment must make it clear that one party with a contractual right against another party is transferring their right of enforcement of the obligations of the contract to another person.” [11]

Malcolm A. Clarke writes :

“Assignment must have been intended. Intention is ascertained by the substance rather than the form of what is said or done.” [12]

2. Application of English Law

Another introductory matter which must be considered in this discussion is the source of law in the insurance arena in Malaysia.

The governing statute in Malaysia in the field of insurance law is the Insurance Act 1996 [13] . This Act, however, does not seem to mention the issue of assigning insurance policies. As such, the provisions of the Civil Law Act 1956 [14] may be referred to in order to provide valuable guidance on the matter.

Section 3 of the Civil Law Act 1956 provides:

“Save so far as other provision has been made or may hereafter be made by any written law in force in Malaysia, the Court shall -

(a) in West Malaysia or any part thereof, apply the common law of England and the rules of equity as administered in England on the 7 th day of April, 1956;...

Provided always that the said common law, rules of equity and statutes of general application shall be applied so far only as the circumstances of the States of Malaysia and their respective inhabitants permit and subject to such qualifications as local circumstances render necessary.”

Section 5(1) of the Civil Law Act 1956 makes particular reference to life and fire insurance. This section provides that :

“In all questions or issues which arise or which have to be decided in the States of West Malaysia ... with respect to the law of ... marine insurance, average, life and fire insurance ... the law to be administered shall be the same as would be administered in England in the like case at the date of the coming into force of this Act [15] , if such question or issue had arisen or had to be decided in England, unless in any case other provision is or shall be made by any written law.”

With the aid of these provisions, English law has often been referred to for guidance in resolving legal dilemmas in the field of insurance law and since the Malaysian Act on point does not seem to have covered the matter of the assignment of insurance policies, as will be discussed below, many academicians and Malaysian judges have relied on the principles enunciated in the English courts and Parliament on this matter.

2.2 Policies of Assurance Act 1867

There is one particular dilemma highlighted by Nik Ramlah Mahmood with regard to the applicability of the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 [16] of England with regard to the legal assignment of life policies. As this author explains :

“In England, a life policy can be legally assigned in accordance with the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 which deals specifically with such assignment or in accordance with section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 [17] which deals with the assignment of a chose in action. [18] ...

As there is no parallel local statute, the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 (UK) is assumed to be applicable in Malaysia and is generally regarded as the only basis for legal assignment of a life policy. The validity of this assumption, however, is questionable. There is in Malaysia a provision similar to section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (UK). This is section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 which provides for the absolute assignment of a chose in action. The existence of this provision can have two possible effects on the law relating to legal assignment of life policies in Malaysia.

One possible effect is that contrary to popular belief and practice, the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 (UK) is in fact inapplicable in Malaysia. According to section 5 of the Civil Law Act 1856, an English Act like the 1867 Act can only be applied if there are no local statutory provisions on the related issue. As the assignment of a life policy is in fact the assignment of a chose in action and there is a local provision on this, there seems to be no valid justification for applying the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 in Malaysia.

The other possible effect is that there are, in Malaysia as in England, two different statutory provisions relating to the assignment of life policies, one under the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 (UK) and the other under the Civil Law Act 1956. As the Civil Law Act provision deals with the assignment of a chose in action generally, its existence should not prevent the application of an English statute which deals specifically with the assignment of life policies.

While a finding by a Malaysian court in favour of the first possible interpretation may alarm those in the insurance industry who have always regarded the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 of England to be the sole basis for the legal assignment of a life policy, such a finding may in the long term bring the practices of the industry in Malaysia in line with those in England where such assignments are now more commonly done under the Law of Property Act than under the Policies of Assurance Act.” [19]

There is no statute in Malaysia that deals exclusively with the area of marine insurance. As such, as Salleh Abas C.J. clarified in The “Melanie” United Oriental Assurance Sdn. Bhd. Kuantan v. W.M. Mazzarol [20] :

“... we must refer to ... the Marine Insurance Act 1906 of the United Kingdom. This Act is made applicable to Malaysia as part of our law by virtue of section 5(1) [21] of our Civil Law Act 1956.” [22]

The Marine Insurance Act 1906 [23] contains a few sections dealing with the concept of assignment in marine insurance. Section 50 of this Act states :

“(1) A marine policy is assignable unless it contains terms expressly prohibiting assignment. It may be assigned either before or after loss.

(2) Where a marine policy has been assigned so as to pass the beneficial interest in such policy, the assignee of the policy is entitled to sue thereon in his own name; and the defendant is entitled to make any defence arising out of the contract which he would have been entitled to make if the action had been brought in the name of the person by or on behalf of whom the policy was effected.

(3) A marine policy may be assigned by indorsement thereon or in other customary manner.” [24]

Section 51 of this Act reads :

“Where the assured has parted with or lost his interest in the subject-matter insured, and has not, before or at the time of so doing, expressly or impliedly agreed to assign the policy, any subsequent assignment of the policy is inoperative.

Provided that nothing in this section affects the assignment of a policy after loss.” [25]

In Colinvaux’s Law of Insurance , section 51 of this Act is explained as having the effect such that :

“This rule is an obvious corollary of insurable interest: if the assignor loses insurable interest, the policy lapses and there is thus nothing to assign. In the converse case, where the assured assigns the policy without assigning the subject-matter, the assignee has no insurable interest and is thus unable to sue on the policy.” [26]

Section 15 of this Act provides :

“Where the assured assigns or otherwise parts with his interest in the subject-matter insured, he does not thereby transfer to the assignee his rights under the contract of insurance, unless there can be an express or implied agreement with the assignee to that effect.

But the provisions of this section do not affect a transmission of interest by operation of law.” [27]

In the book, Macgillivray & Parkington on Insurance Law - relating to all risks other than marine [28] , the position when the subject-matter insured is assigned is summarised as :

“If the assured voluntarily parts with all his interest in the subject-matter of the insurance policy, the policy lapses since the assured no longer has any insurable interest and can have suffered no loss [29] . The assignment must, however, be complete [30] and if the assured retains any insurable interest he will be able to recover under the policy; thus, if he enters into a contract to convey the subject-matter and the subject-matter is lost or damaged, the assured can still recover even though the risk has passed to the purchaser [31] ; until the vendor is paid he cannot be certain of receiving the purchase price and it is in effect this risk which, in such a case, is the subject of insurance. [32] The policy will probably remain in force ever after conveyance if the purchase price has not been paid, provided that the vendor has not parted with his lien. The lien will ensure that the assured still has an insurable interest. [33] An assured who enters into a contract of sale will often agree to transfer the insurance policy and, if he effectively does so, the transferee will be able to recover under it.”

Digby C. Jess writes:

“Property and liability insurances are personal contracts, and do not run with the property if it is sold or otherwise disposed of or with a transfer of liabilities of the insured. Therefore, both at common law and equity, as assignment of a policy of insurance can only be valid of the insurer consents to this course, whereby, in truth a new contract of insurance is effected between the assignee and the insurer, and that between the assignor (the original insured) and the insurer lapses.” [34]

In The North of England Pure Oil-Cake Company v The Archangel Maritime Insurance Company, [35] a firm insured a cargo of linseed to be transported by sea. The policy was to cover every stage of the voyage as if each stage of the voyage were separately insured and the policy of insurance was expressed to be for the benefit of the firm and the assignees. During the voyage, the firm sold the cargo. Part of the cargo was sunk due to perils within the terms of the policy. Later, the firm assigned the policy to the purchasers of the linseed.

Cockburn C.J. in this case held :

“We are agreed on one point, which entitles the defendants to judgment, viz. that, the policy not having been assigned until after the interest of the assignors had ceased, an effective assignment was impossible.” [36]

In Sadler’s Company and Badcock, [37] a lessee of a house insured the house from fire. After the lessee’s lease expired but while the insurance policy was still in effect, the house burnt down. Following the destruction of the house, the lessee assigned the policy to the landlords. The landlords then attempted to claim the benefit of the policy from the insurance company.

The Lord Chancellor in this case decided that a policyholder could not assign a policy at a point in time when the policyholder does not have any interest in the insured property. The lessee in this case was not able to assign the policy since at the time the lessee purported to assign the policy the lessee had no longer any interest in the house. In the words of the judge :

“And I am of opinion that the party insured ought to have a property in the thing insured at the time of the insurance made, and at the time of the loss by fire, or he cannot be relieved. Mrs. Strode [the lessee] had no property at the time of the fire, consequently no loss to her; and if she had no interest, nothing could pass to the plaintiffs [landlords] by assignment. ...

If the insured was not to have a property at the time of the insurance or loss, any one might insure another’s house, which might have a bad tendency to burning houses. Insuring the thing from damage is not the meaning of the policy, it must mean insuring Mrs. Strode from damage, and she has suffered none.” [38]

In The Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England v The Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation, [39] one ecclesiastical body sold a farm that was covered by a fire insurance policy to another ecclesiastical body. At the time of the sale, no mention was made about the assignment of the policy. After the sale, the farm burnt down and the purchaser seeks to claim on the policy.

The insurance company argues that there was no valid assignment of the policy and as such, the insurance company is not liable to the seller since the seller had no interest in the insured property and thus have no insurable interest at the time of the accident nor the purchaser since the policy has not been validly assigned to the purchaser. Charles J. in this case agreed with the arguments of the insurance company and held:

“The whole transaction was complete. Can anybody sue? The Commissioners [seller] cannot sue because there has been no assignment of the policy to them. ... In this case the vendors have conveyed away their property and received their consideration ... I must therefore give judgment for the defendants [insurance company], with costs.” [40]

In Collinridge v The Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation, [41] a company which owned a number of buildings insured the same against fire. These buildings were indeed destroyed by fire. However, before the fire took place, these buildings were in the process of being acquired by the Metropolitan Board of Works. There was no mention of an accompanying assignment of the fire insurance policy. The Board had yet to make payments for the conveyance. The insurance company disputes liability.

Mellor J. in this case held:

“It appears that the plaintiff at the time of the fire was in the position of unpaid vendor, and had possession of his premises. Under these circumstances, I think there is nothing to prevent him from bringing an action to recover the amount which he has insured.” [42]

Lush J. in this case concurred :

“The plaintiff is in the position of a person who has entered into a contract to sell his property to another. ... The contract will no doubt be completed, but legally the buildings are still his property. The defendants [insurance company] by their policy undertook to make good any loss or damage to the property by fire. There is nothing to shew that any collateral dealings with the premises, such as those stated in this case, are to limit his liability. If the plaintiff had actually conveyed them away before the fire, that would have been a defence to the action, for he would have then have had no interest at the time of the loss. But in the present case he still has a right to the possession of his property, and the defendants are bound to pay him the insurance money ...” [43]

In Rayner v Preston, [44] a set of buildings covered by a fire insurance policy were contracted to be sold. After the date the contract was signed but before the contract was completed, the buildings were damaged by fire. The contract contained no mention of the fire insurance policy. The insurance company made payments to the seller of the buildings. The purchaser seeks to claim this money or to compel the seller to apply the money received towards making repairs to the buildings.

The first argument proposed by the purchaser was that although the contract made no specific mention of the insurance policy, the contract gave the purchaser a right to all contracts related to the buildings. Cotton L.J. in this case was not in support of this contention and held :

“The contact passes all things belonging to the vendors appurtenant to or necessarily connected with the use and enjoyment of the property mentioned in the contract, but not, in my opinion, collateral contracts; and such, in my opinion, ... the policy of insurance is. It is not a contract limiting or affecting the interest of the vendors in the property sold, of affecting their right to enforce the contract of sale, for it is conceded that, if there were no insurance and the buildings sold were burnt, the contract for sale would be enforced. It is not even a contract in the event of a fire to repair the buildings, but a contract in that event to pay the vendors a sum of money which, if received by them, they may apply in any way they think fit. It is a contract, not to repair the damage to the buildings, but to pay a sum not exceeding the sum insured or the money value of the injury. In my opinion, the contract of insurance is not of such a nature as to pass without apt words under a contract for sale of the thing insured.” [45]

The next argument proposed by the purchaser was that between the time of the contract being made and the conveyance being completed, the seller was a trustee of the property for the purchaser and as such, the seller is a trustee for the purchaser with regard to the money received for the property during this period of trusteeship. This argument did not find favour with the court either and Cotton L.J. held:

“An unpaid vendor is a trustee in a qualified sense only, and is so only because he has made a contact which a Court of Equity will give effect to by transferring the property sold to the purchaser, and so far as he is a trustee he is so only in respect of the property contracted to be sold. Of this the policy is not a part. A vendor is in no way a trustee for the purchaser of rents accruing before the time fixed for completion, and here the fire occurred and the right to recover the money accrued before the day fixed for completion. The argument that the money is received in respect of the property which is trust property is, in my opinion, fallacious.” [46]

Brett L.J. in this case concurred :

“... I venture to say that I doubt whether it is a true description of the relation between the parties to say that from the time of the making of the contract, or at any time, one is ever trustee for the other. They are only parties to a contract of sale and purchase of which a Court of Equity will under certain circumstances decree a specific performance. But even if the vendor was a trustee for the vendee, it does not seem to me at all to follow that anything under the contract of insurance would pass. As I have said, the contract of insurance is a mere personal contact for the payment of money. It is not a contract which runs with the land. If it were, there ought to be a decree that upon completion of the purchaser the policy be handed over. But that is not the law. The contract of insurance does not run with the land; it is a mere personal contract, and unless it is assigned no suit or action can be maintained upon it except between the original parties to it... [47]

“I therefore, with deference, think that the Plaintiffs here [purchaser] cannot recover from the Defendant [seller], on the ground that there was no relation of any kind or sort between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with regard to the policy, and therefore none with regard to any money received under the policy.” [48]

James L.J. in this case gave a dissenting judgment on this point and held that :

“... the relation between the vendor and the purchaser became, and was in law, as from the date of the contract and up to the completion of it, the relation of trustee and cestui que trust , and that the trustee received the insurance money by reason of and as the actual amount of the damage done to the trust property.” [49]

In Castellain v Preston and Others, [50] the defendants owned a piece of land and buildings which were covered by a fire insurance policy. The defendants entered into negotiations to sell the premises to their tenants. In the midst of these negotiations, a fire broke out which damaged a part of the buildings. By the time of the fire the contract of sale was signed, a deposit was paid but the contract was not completely performed as yet. The insurance company made payments to the defendants on the insurance policy for the fire. The tenants paid the full purchase price and proceeded with the slae despite the fire. The insurance company brings the present action.

Brett L.J. commented on the foundation of insurance law :

“The very foundation, in my opinion, of every rule which has been applied to insurance law is this, namely, that the contract of insurance contained in a marine or fire policy is a contract of indemnity, and of indemnity only, and that this contract means that the assured, in case of a loss against which the policy has been made, shall be fully indemnified, but shall never be more than fully indemnified. That is the fundamental principle of insurance, and if ever a proposition is brought forward which is at variance with it, that is to say, which either will prevent the assured from obtaining a full indemnity, or which will give to the assured more than a full indemnity, that proposition must certainly be wrong.” [51]

Cotton L.J. added :

“The policy is really a contract to indemnify the person insured for the loss which he has sustained in consequence of the peril insured against which has happened, and from that it follows, of course, that as it is only a contract of indemnity, it is only to pay that loss which the assured may have sustained by reason of the fire which has occurred. In order to ascertain what that loss is, everything must be taken into account which is received by and comes to the hand of the assured, and which diminishes the loss. It is only the amount of the loss, when it is considered as a contract of indemnity, which is to be paid after taking into account and estimating those benefits or sums of money which the assured may have received in diminution of the loss... [52]

Therefore the conclusion at which I have arrived is, that if the purchase-money has been paid in full, the insurance office will get back that which they have paid, on the ground that the subsequent payment of the price which had been before agreed upon, and the contract for payment of which was existing at the time, must be brought into account by the assured, because it diminishes the loss against which the insurance office merely undertook to indemnify them [53] .”

Mahinder Singh Sidhu observes :

“An assignment of the policy means a ‘change of interest’ i.e., somebody else is substituted for the original insured in the motor insurance contract. All motor policies can be validly assigned but the insurer’s prior consent is essential.” [54]

Mahinder Singh Sidhu also writes :

“A motor insurance contract is always personal in the sense that some human element is inevitably involved, and in a technical sense, the insurer’s decision to enter on the contract depends on the personal qualities of the insured and the insurer’s confidence in him. The insurers have the right to question and investigate the proposed insured and vary the terms of the contract. If an assignment takes place it is termed as a “novation”, since the assignment virtually creates a new contract with the assignee.

A valid assignment gives the assignee the right to sue and gives the insurance company a good legal discharge without the necessity of joining the assignor. Where there is a conditional sale of a car to the new purchaser, the ownership of the car still remains with the insured, and does not amount to any transfer of his insurable interest. But where there has been a complete sale and transfer of the vehicle and handing over of the policy documents to the purchaser, it does not create a valid assignment, though there is a transfer of interest of the subject matter of the insurance. The transfer of the insurable interest causes the policy to lapse, and the purchaser has no insurance cover if he drives the car and meets with an accident.” [55]

In Peters v General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corporation Ltd. [56] , the owner of a motor van sold the vehicle to another person and purportedly assigned the motor insurance policy for the van to the purchaser. After the sale, the purchaser was involved in an accident and attempted to make a claim to the insurance company based on the motor insurance policy purportedly assigned. The insurance company disputed the purchaser’s right to claim under the insurance policy issued to the seller of the van.

Sir Wilfred Greene M.R. in this case decided that:

“Assuming in his favour that there was an intention to assign the policy, the fundamental remains : Is this policy one which is capable of assignment? The judge held that it was not, and I am in entire agreement with that.” [57]

The effect of the motor insurance policy was that the insurance company undertook to indemnify the policyholder in the case of an accident while the car was driven by the policyholder or anyone else driving the vehicle with the policyholder’s consent or permission.

Sir Wilfred Greene M.R. explained the effect of deciding that such a policy was assignable:

“It appears to me as plain as anything can be that a contract of this kind is in its very nature not assignable. The effect of the assignment, if it were possible to assign, was ... that, from and after the assignment, the name of Mr. Pope, the assignee [the purchaser], would have taken the place of that of Mr. Coomber [the seller] in the policy, and the policy would have to be read as though Mr. Pope’s name were mentioned instead of Mr. Coomber’s. In other words, the effect of the assignment would be to impose upon the insurance company an obligation to indemnify a new assured, or persons ordered or permitted to drive by that new assured. That appears to be altering in toto the character of the risk under a policy of this kind. The risk that A.B. is going to incur liability by driving his motor car, or that persons authorised by A.B. are going to cause injury by driving his motor car, is one thing. The risk that C.D. will incur liability by driving a motor car, or that persons authorised by C.D. will incur liability through driving a motor car, is, or may be, a totally different thing.” [58]

One reason given by Sir Wilfred Greene M.R. for deciding that an insurance policy of this kind was not capable of assignment was that :

“The insurance company in this case, as in every case, make inquiries as to the driving record of the person proposing to take out a policy of insurance with them. The business reasons for that are obvious, because a man with a good record will be received at an ordinary rate of premium and a man with a bad record may not be received at all, or may be asked to pay a higher premium. The policy is, in a very true sense, one in which there is inherent a personal element of such a character as to make it, in my opinion, quite impossible to say that the policy is one assignable at the volition of the assured.” [59]

The second reason given by the judge as the basis of his judgement was that the according to the Road Traffic Act 1930 [60] in the United Kingdom, it is unlawful for anyone to use a motor vehicle or permit anyone else to use the motor vehicle unless that user or other person permitted by the user is covered by a motor insurance policy for the use of the motor vehicle. [61] Additionally under the statute, if a judgment is obtained in respect of a liability covered by the policy against any person insured by the policy, then the insurance company is generally liable to make the required payment to the person who has the benefit of the judgment. [62]

The purchaser of the car in this case argued that he was driving the car with the permission of the policyholder [63] and as such, should receive the same benefit of coverage in terms of the insurance policy. Based on this rationale, the purchaser argued that since judgment was obtained against him in respect of the accident and since he was covered by the policy, the insurance company should be liable under the judgment and make payments to the party who obtained the judgment. The court, however, held that :

“At the date when the accident took place, the entire property in this car was vested in Pope [the purchaser]. He had bought the car. On the sale of the car, the property passed to him ... The property, therefore, passed to the purchaser long before this accident took place. The circumstance that he had not paid the whole of the purchase price is irrelevant for that purpose, because that circumstance does not leave in the vendor, Mr. Coomber, any interest in the car. There is no vendor’s lien, or anything of that sort. The car had become the out-and-out property of Pope. When Pope was using that car, he was not using it by the permission of Coomber [the seller]. It is an entire misuse of language to say that. He was using it as owner, and by virtue of his rights as owner, and not by virtue of any permission of Coomber.” [64]

In Smith v Ralph, [65] the scenario was basically the same as above, namely, that the purchaser of a motor vehicle again tried to claim the coverage of the insurance policy issued to the seller of the motor vehicle on the basis that the purchaser was driving the motor vehicle with the permission or consent of the policyholder.

Lord Parker of Waddington C.J. in this case similarly held that the purchaser was not covered by the policy as the policyholder could not assign any rights in the policy when he no longer had any interest in the vehicle covered by the policy. In the words of the judge :

“Any permission or authority given by the policyholder ... could not extend beyond the time when he ceased to be a policyholder in the sense of having any insurable interest.” [66]

In Nanyang Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Salbiah & Anor, [67] a car was bought on behalf of a company. The company then entered into negotiations to sell the car to the purchaser. The terms of the proposed sale in the written contract included the obligation of the purchaser to make an initial payment and thereafter to continue paying for the car in instalments. The parties varied this term by oral agreement when the purchaser did not make this initial payment in full by allowing him to make this initial payment in instalments. The car was involved in an accident and judgment was obtained against the driver of the car who was the purchaser. The insurance company disputed liability for the claim against them to honour the judgment obtained as they argued that the seller of the car no longer had any insured interest with the proposed sale of the car and as such, the insurance policy has lapsed.

Azmi C.J. in this case held:

“It is therefore quite clear in my view from the evidence, that the company intended to retain the property in the car until Abdul Karim [the purchaser] has paid in full the initial payment of $1,000 under the D.6 [the contract] when he could execute a hire-purchase agreement with a financial company. ...

For the above reason, I would therefore with respect, agree with the finding of the trial judge that the appellants [seller] had an insurable interest in the car on the date of the accident and the car was being driven by Abdul Karim with the permission of the insured.” [68]

In People’s Insurance Co. of Malaya Ltd. v Ho Ah Kum & Anor, [69] the driver of a van was sued by the estate of a deceased who was killed in an accident due to the negligent driving of this driver. The estate of the deceased obtained judgment against the driver of the van. The driver, it was alleged, was driving the van with the permission of the owner of the van who had an insurance policy on the van. The question that arose in this case was whether the driver was so driving with the permission of the owner or whether the owner of the van had sold the van to the driver and as such parted with possession of the van before the date of the accident.

The driver was actually an employee of the owner of the van who at the time of the accident was using returning from a delivery made on behalf of the employer in the course of his employment. The evidence showed that the owner told the driver that the ownership of the van would not be transferred unless and until the driver made full payment of the purchase price. The owner was aware that the reason the driver bought the van was to use the van in making these deliveries.

Wee Chong Jin C.J. in this case held on the facts that:

“In any event, having regard to the relationship between Foo [driver] and Yeo [owner] throughout the material times; to the purpose for which Foo agreed to purchase from Yeo the motor van; and most important of all to the uncontradicted evidence of Foo that when the accident occurred he was returning after delivering Yeo’s flour and there being no evidence to the contrary, I take the view that there is sufficient evidence on the record for me to find and I do find that at the time of the accident Foo was driving the van on the order of the insured.” [70]

In Tattersall v. Drysdale, [71] the driver of a car was involved in an accident and judgment was obtained against him. The driver had an insurance policy with the London & Edinburgh Insurance Company for a Standard Swallow Saloon car. This Standard car was sold to a company who was in turn selling the driver a Riley Saloon car belonging to the director of this company which was under a Lloyd’s Eclipse insurance Policy. The driver was in the process of having his insurance company, the London & Edinburgh Insurance Company, cover the Riley car and no longer cover the Standard car. However, this change was not made before the accident as yet. The question that arose was which insurance company was liable for the accident.

Goddard J. in this case held :

“As to the question of permission, I am clearly of opinion that he was driving with Gilling’s [the director of the company the Riley car was bought from] permission. ... The truth is that no bargain about insurance was ever made. Gilling, on handing over his car after the bargain had been made, wished the plaintiff [driver] to insure it and he was willing to do so, but he was allowed to drive it as he wished ...” [72]

Both insurance policies contained a clause that coverage is extended to indemnify a person driving the insured car with the assured’s permission provided that the driver is not entitled to indemnity under any other insurance policy. The next question that arose, as such, was whether the Riley car was covered by the insurance policy of the driver. The judge held that it did not. This insurance policy was stated to cover the Standard car which had been sold. The Riley car was not entered on this policy. The coverage was extended to the situation when the assured drove another car temporarily but it is the car stated in the policy which is the subject of the insurance. As such, this insurance policy in the name of the driver lapsed when the car the insurance policy was stated to cover, namely the Standard car, was sold.

The driver held to be driving the Riley car with the permission of the assured, namely the director of the company who owned this car with an insurance policy, the judge went on to direct that the insurance company of the director, namely, the Lloyd’s Eclipse insurance Policy, through the extension clause discussed above, covered the driver of the Riley car and as such, was liable on the judgment obtained for the accident.

In Roslan bin Abdullah v. New Zealand Insurance Co. Ltd, [73] there was a collision between 2 trucks. Judgment was obtained and the appellant then sought to claim against the insurance company who had issued an insurance policy on the respondent’s truck. The insurance company disputed liability as the judgment obtained was not entered against the assured as the assured was the previous owner of the truck and not the current owner, the respondent company.

Wan Suleiman F.J. [74] in this case, with regard to whether there was any assignment or novation of the insurance policy from the previous owner to the new owner, affirmed the following principles from the judgment of Goddard J. in Peters v General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corporation Ltd. [75]

Goddard J. (as he then was) held:

(a) when the vendor sold the car, the insurance policy automatically lapsed.

(b) at the time of the accident, the purchaser could not be said to be driving the car by the order or with the permission of the vendor, as the car was then the purchaser’s property.

(c) the insured is not entitled to assign his policy to a third party. An insurance policy is a contract of personal indemnity, and the insurer cannot be compelled to accept responsibility in respect of a third party who may be quite unknown to them.” [76]

Wan Suleiman F.J., with regard to whether the driver, as an employee of the current owner of the truck was driving with the permission of the previous owner of the truck, held :

“We are informed by counsel for the appellant that Wee & Wee Realty Sdn. Bhd. [the previous owner of the truck] and United Malaysia Co. Ltd. [the current owner of the truck] the second defendant in C.S. K.124/76 are sister companies. Be that as it may they are distinct entities. The respondents were no longer the owners of the truck and therefore there cannot be any question of them ordering or permitting the first defendant [employee of the current owner of the truck] in C.S. K.124/76 to drive it.” [77]

S. Santhana Dass writes :

“Life insurance seeks to reduce the financial uncertainties arising from the natural contingencies in old age and death and to ease the burden in the case of possible misfortunes - injury and sickness. The principal function of life insurance business is to furnish protection against the financial needs which may be caused by disability and death. It provides food, shelter and clothing, when illness, injury or death cuts off the income of the breadwinner.” [78]

In the book, Colinvaux’s Law of Insurance , it is written:

“Life policies are to be considered something more than a contract. They are treated as securities for money payable at an uncertain but future date which is bound to occur.” [79]

Robert J. Surridge, Sara Forrest, Noleen Dignan, Alison Broadberry & Duncan Backus writes :

“A practical definition might be that a life assurance contract is one whereby one party (the insurer) undertakes for a consideration (the premium) to pay money (the sum assured) to or for the benefit of the other party (the assured) upon the happening of a specified event, where the object of the assured is to provide a sum for himself or others at some future date, or for others in the event of his death.” [80]

Robert J. Surridge, Sara Forrest, Noleen Dignan, Alison Broadberry & Duncan Backus also write with regard to the assignment of life policies that :

“An assignment of a life policy is a document or action which is effective to transfer the ownership of the policy from one person to another. Assignments may be made for a variety of reasons, including:

- Sale of exchange;

- Gift or voluntary transfer;

- Settlement, transferring the policy to trustees to give effect to successive or contingent interests;

- Transfer to existing trustees of a settlement or to beneficiaries in pursuance of the trusts;

- Mortgage; transfer of mortgage; or reassignment on repayment;or

- Assignment to a trustee for the benefit of creditors.” [81]

Nik Ramlah Mahmood writes:

“In relation to life insurance, an assignment means the transfer of one’s interest in the policy to another. Such an assignment commonly happens when an insured under an own life policy uses the policy, which is a valuable piece of property, as security for a loan and assigns it to the creditor. This usually takes the form of a conditional assignment whereby the policy would be reassigned to the insured once he has paid all his debts. Banks and other credit-giving institutions which lend huge sums of money to individuals normally insist that the borrower takes out a policy on his life and assigns it to them as security for the loan.

A life policy can also be unconditionally or absolutely assigned either as a gift or under a contract of sale. Such an assignment is absolute and does not leave any residual rights with the assignor.” [82]

In Dalby v. The India and London Life-Assurance Company, [83] the Anchor Life-Assurance Company insured the life of his late Royal Highness, the Duke of Cambridge. This policy was effected by Wright on behalf of the company.

Parke B. stated in this case:

“The contract commonly called life-assurance, when properly considered, is a mere contract to pay a certain sum of money on the death of a person, in consideration of the due payment of a certain annuity for his life, - the amount of the annuity being calculated, in the first instance, according to the probable duration of the life; and when once fixed, it is constant and invariable. The stipulated amount of annuity is to be uniformly paid on one side, and the sum to be paid in the event of death is always (except when bonuses have been given by prosperous offices) the same, on the other. This species of insurance in no way resembles a contract of indemnity.

Policies of assurance against fire ands against marine risks, are both properly contracts of indemnity, - the insurer engaging to make good, within certain limited amounts, the losses sustained by the assured in their buildings, ships, and effects... [84]

... a contract of indemnity only. But that is not of the nature of what is termed an assurance for life; it really is what it is on the fact of it, - a contract to pay a certain sum in the event of death [85] .”

S. Santhana Dass points out that:

“An assignee under a life insurance contract can re-assign the policy to the original owner.” [86]

The Policies of Assurance Act 1867 [87] defines a life insurance policy as “... ‘any instrument by which the payment of moneys, by or out of the funds of an assurance company, on the happening of any contingency depending on the duration of human life, is assured or secured’. [88] ”

The Policies of Assurance Act 1867 provides that an assignee can sue in his own name if [89] :

(i) the assignee has the right in equity to receive and the right to give a valid discharge to the assurance company for the policy money, that is, it was a precondition that the assignee be beneficially entitled to the policy money or entitled to receive the policy money as a trustee or mortgagee at the time of the claim;

(ii) the assignee has obtained an assignment, either by endorsement on the policy or by separate instrument, in the words or to the effect set forth in the Schedule to this Act; and

(iii) written notice of the assignment had been given to the insurance company.

Cotton L.J. in the case In re Turcan [90] commented :

“Before the Act of 1867 [91] (30 & 31 Vict. C. 144) a policy could not be assigned at law, but now it can ...” [92]

Section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 [93] states :

“Any absolute assignment, by writing, under the hand of the assignor, not purporting to be by way of charge only, of any debt or other legal chose in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to receive or claim the debt or chose in action, shall be, and be deemed to have been, effectual in law, subject to all equities which would have been entitled to priority over the right of the assignee under the law as it existed in the State before the date of the coming into force of this Act [94] , to pass and transfer the legal right to the debt or chose in action, from the date of the notice, and all legal and other remedies for the same, and the power to give a good discharge for the same, without the concurrence of the assignor.”

S. Santhana Dass has summarised the requirements under section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 in order to effect a legal assignment of a life insurance policy as follows :

“The requirements for an absolute assignment of a life policy are as follows:-

(a) the assignment must be in writing and signed by the assignor (the insured);

(b) it must be absolute and not by way of charge only; and

(c) notice in writing of the assignment must be given to the insurer.” [95]

S. Santhana Dass goes on to explain:

“The common practice amongst insurers with respect to assignments (be it under the Section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 or the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 (U.K.) can be summarised as follows:-

(i) An assignment should be in writing and a life policy can be assigned absolutely or conditionally.

(ii) The written notice of assignment must be sent to the Head Office or the Principal Office of the insurer.

(iii) Upon receipt of the assignment notice the insurer registers each notice.

(iv) If there is no written notice given to the insurer and the insurer has made payment to a person other than the assignee, the insurers shall not be liable to the assignee thereafter. The assignee cannot sue the insurer for recovery of any benefit under the policy unless a notice of assignment has been sent to the insurer.

(v) An assignment can be done by effecting an endorsement and attaching it to the back of the policy. Otherwise it is effected by a separate deed signed by all parties concerned i.e. the assignor, assignee and the insurer.

(vi) If there is more than one assignment, the priority of claims by the assignor will depend upon the priority in the date of receipt of the notice by the insurer. Thus position has now been altered by Section 168(2) of the Insurance Act 1996 where priority is based on the date of the assignment rather than date of the notice.” [96]

Robert J. Surridge, Sara Forrest, Noleen Dignan, Alison Broadberry & Duncan Backus writes:

“Where there has not been a legal assignment but the assignee has given consideration , equity will (subject to the riles on priority) assist him to perfect his title against third parties, even though he may not have obtained formal assignment.

If, however, a voluntary assignee seeks the support of equity, he will succeed only where:

(1) the assignment is complete between assignor and assignee, ie everything necessary has been done to make a present transfer and render the assignment binding; or

(2) the assignor has constituted himself as trustee for the assignee.” [97]

Roy Hodgin writes :

“Assignment can be made in equity ... commonly, under the Policies of Assurance Act 1867, which requires that notice of such assignment be given in writing to the insurer. Under the 1867 Act, the assignment may be made either by an endorsement on the policy or by a separate document using the wording set out in the Schedule to the Act.” [98]

Cohen L.J. in Inland Revenue Commissioners v. Electric and Musical Industries, Ltd. [99] explained :

“It is quite true that as a matter of law there is no special form required to constitute an equitable assignment. Whether or not what has been done in any particular transaction amounts to an equitable assignment is a matter of inference from the facts and documents concerned ...” [100]

“There is no specific method of effecting an equitable assignment of a life policy. The only important requirement is that there must be a clear indication that the object of the transaction is to transfer the benefits in the policy from one party to another. No written document is necessary. A common way of effecting an equitable assignment is by the assignor depositing the policy of insurance with the assignee. An equitable assignee cannot enforce his rights directly against the insurer in his own name, he must either compel the assignor to sue on his behalf or sue the assignor and join the insurer to the action. The equitable assignee is thus not in a position to give a legal disharge to the insurer.” [101]

Tan Lee Meng writes:

“For the assignor to claim under the policy, the assignment must be complete.” [102]

In the case In re Williams [103] , an owner of an insurance policy paid the insurance premiums until his death. The court had to construe a purported assignment of the policy to his housekeeper through the following signed endorsement:

“’I authorise Ada Maud Ball, my housekeeper and no other person to draw this insurance in the event of my predeceasing her this being my sole desire and intention at time of taking this policy out and this is my signature.’” [104]

Lord Cozens-Hardy M.R. held:

“According to my construction it is not an assignment at all. The question whether in the circumstances there is a voluntary gift always involves the consideration not whether the donor might have given the property, but what is the form in which he has purported to give it. Take the case of shares in a limited company which are only transferable by deed, or the case of Consols which are only transferable at the Bank of England; it is quite clear that a mere letter not under seal in either of these cases purporting to assign the property would not have been complete, the donor would not have done all he could to perfect it, and the intended gift would have failed. Of course if there had been valuable consideration for the assignment the position would have been different.” [105]

Warrington L.J. in this case agreed:

“The assignee in the present case is a volunteer, and she claims to have received in the assignor’s lifetime the gift of a certain chose in action, namely, a policy of insurance, the amount secured by which is in its nature only to be paid on the death of the assured. It is a policy on the assignor’s own life. Claiming as she does as a volunteer and alleging that the assignor made this gift to her, she can only succeed if she can show that the assignor did everything which according to the nature of the property comprised in the assignment was necessary to be done in order to transfer the property and render the assignment binding upon him. ...

The question turns largely if not entirely on the construction of the document. Of course the mere form of words is immaterial if the assignor has used any form of words which expressed a final and settled intention to transfer the property to the assignee there and then. That would be sufficient. He need not use the word “give” or “assign” or any particular words.” [106]

Warrington L.J. construed the words of the endorsement and came to the conclusion that it merely created a revocable authority to receive the policy money after the assignor’s death which was a nullity as the authority would be revoked by the assignor’s death [107] . Lord Cozens-Hardy M.R. similarly construed the endorsement as either a mere: [108]

• power of attorney, though not under seal, authorising the person named to receive the money which power becomes inoperative on the death of the person conferring it; or

• mandate which ceased to be operative at death.

In Newman v. Newman, [109] section 3 of the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 was construed. This section states:

“No assignment made after the passing of this Act of a policy of life assurance shall confer on the assignee therein named, his executors, administrators, or assigns, any right to sue for the amount of such policy, or the moneys assured or secured thereby, until a written notice of the date and purport of such assignment has been given to the assurance company liable under such policy at its principal place of business for the time being; and the date on which such notice was received shall regulate the priority of all claims under any assignment; and a payment bona fide made in respect of any policy by any assurance company before the date on which such notice was received shall be as valid against the assignee giving such notice as if this Act had not been passed.” [110]

North J. in this case interpreted this section in the following manner:

“That Act was passed in order to avoid the necessity of joining the assignor of the policy in actions against the insurance office, and it provides that if a certain notice is given to the office then the assignee may sue without joining the assignor. Then these words occur ‘And the date on which such notice shall be received shall regulate the priority of all claims under any assignment.’ It was contended that these words went much further than was necessary for the protection of the insurance office, and affected the rights of the parties inter se . ... In my opinion that is not the meaning of the statute, which was not intended to give a simpler remedy against an insurance office, and also to give facilities to insurance offices in settling claims by enabling them to recognise as the first claim the claim of the person who first gave such notice as required by the statute. It was not intended in my opinion to enact that a person who had advanced money upon a second charge without notice of the first, and made subject to it, should be giving statutory notice of the office exclude the person who had the prior incumbrance.” [111]

In Spencer v. Clarke [112] , a life insurance policy was used as security for two separate loans from separate parties. The contention was then which party had priority in terms of the security.

Hall, V.C. held:

“I am of the opinion that as between the Plaintiffs [the second creditor] in this action and the Defendant Tranter [the first creditor], the Defendant Tranter is entitled to priority as to the policy in the Westminster and General Life Assurance Association . That policy was deposited with him by way of equitable security. He is first in point of time, and therefore first as regards his security.” [113]

The first creditor then contended that he obtained priority by giving notice to the insurance office of his claim first in accordance with the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 . However, Hall V.C. held on this point that :

“In order to bring the case within the statute, there must, according to the plain words of the statute and the explanatory form of assignment given in the schedule, be an assignment, and an agreement to assign upon request is not an assignment.” [11]

“In essence, whether there has been a valid assignment under the provisions of the Policies of Assurance Act or section 4(6) of the Civil Law Act, all claims to priority amongst the assignees and encumbrances of a policy are dealt with on the basis that all claimants are equitable assignees so long as the proceeds of a policy are with the insurers or have been paid into court. The priority of equitable assignment is dependent on the date of assignment and the fact that there has been notice of prior equities does not affect the position. However, if X is an equitable assignee for value and Y is the holder of a prior equity, X can claim priority over Y if he has no actual or constructive notice of the earlier assignment and if he has given formal notice to the insurers of the assignment before the insurers have come to know of Y’s interest or if X has been misled by Y into taking the assignment or if Y has by his negligence contributed to the creation of the assignment to X.” [115]

Robert M. Merkin writes with regard to priorities of assignments:

“... a number of basic principles may be stated. First, the general equitable rule is that assignments rank in priority in order of their date of creation, but this is subject to the further rule that, where one or more assignees have given notice to the insurer, priority is determined by the date of notice. Secondly, the giving of notice to the insurer will obtain priority only for an assignee, whether legal or equitable, who was unaware of earlier assignments at the date of his own assignment. Knowledge for these purposes may be actual or constructive; the fact, for example, that the assured cannot deposit the policy with the assignee has been held [116] to put him on notice that it may have been deposited by way of assignment earlier. ... Thirdly, it is possible to have a legal assignment only by the giving of notice to the insurer.” [117]

S. Santhana Dass points out that :

“This common law position has been altered by Section 168(2) of the Insurance Act 1996 ... Notice of assignment to the insurers are no more relevant for the purpose of determining priority which puts the insurer in a more difficult position. Do they have to ensure that there are no prior assignment before paying to an assignee? It would be impractical to impose such a duty on the insurers because they would have no means of getting such information. As long as they pay to the assignee, whose assignment they had notice, they would be free of liability in respect of any claim, provided they have no knowledge of any earlier assignment. It may be prudent for insurers to include in their standard assignment form, a declaration by the insured that he has not created any prior assignment in respect of the policy at the time of execution of the assignment.” [118]

Section 168(2) of the Malaysian Insurance Act 1996 [119] provides :

“Where more than one person are entitled under the security or the assignment, the respective rights of the persons entitled under the security or the assignment shall be in the order of priority according to the priority of the date on which the security or the assignment was created, both security and assignment being treated as one class for this purpose.”

7.1 Assignment of Insurance Policies

Francis Tierney and Paul Braithwaite writes:

“An insurance policy is a contract under which the insured has defined rights and obligations. An assignment of an insurance policy may be defined as follows:

An assignment of an insurance policy by an insured is the transfer of the rights and obligations of the insured under the policy to another who then becomes the insured in place of the original insured.” [120]

Ray Hodgin writes:

“Assignment of insurance policies has an important role in commercial life. A common example is where a mortgagee requires the mortgagor to effect a life policy to cover the extent of the loan should the mortgagor die before the loan is repaid. The policy is then assigned to the mortgagee [121] .”

Roy Hodgin points out the “... desire of the courts to make the policy assignable and therefore as flexible as possible ...” [122] In order to illustrate this point, this author discusses the United States case of Grigsby v Russell [123] where a life policy was taken out by someone on his own life. This person paid two premiums and no more as he required the money for medical care. This person assigned the policy to someone else for value and the assignee continued to pay the premiums. Upon the assignor’s death, the question that arose was whether the insurance company should pay the proceeds to the assignor’s estate or the assignee. The Supreme Court of the United Stated held that the proceeds should be paid to the assignee. Mr. Justice Holmes in this case commented:

“Of course, the ground suggested for denying the validity of an assignment for a person having no interest in the life insured is the public policy that refuses to allow insurance to be taken out by such persons in the first place ... the ground for the objection to life insurance without interest in the earlier English cases was not the temptation to murder but the fact that such wagers came to be regarded as a mischievous kind of gaming ... On the other hand, life insurance has become in our days one of the best recognised forms of investment and self-compelled savings. So far as reasonable safety permits, it is desirable to give to life policies the ordinary characteristics of property ... To deny the right to sell except to persons having such an interest is to diminish appreciably the value of the contract in the owner’s hands.”

This indication of the attitude of the American courts as quoted by an English writer is noteworthy. However, in Malaysia, the courts are bound by the beneficiary of a life policy proving that he/she has an insurable interest in the life insured under section 152 of the Insurance Act 1996. [124]

“For a valid assignment of personal contracts such as contracts of fire insurance and liability insurance, the insurer’s consent is required... [125]

To be valid, an assignment by the insured of a non-life policy must be contemporaneous with an assignment of the subject matter of insurance to the assignee. The insured will not be in a position to assign the policy at a later date as he will no longer have an insurable interest in the property, in respect of which the policy was issued [126] . ...

An assignor of a life policy, which is a valuable chose in action, may effect a legal assignment of his policy by virtue of the provisions of the Policies of Assurance Act [127] , which only concerns the assignment of life policies, or by virtue of the provisions of section 4(6) of the Civil Law Act [128] , which concerns the assignment of all choses in action including life policies [129] .”

S. Santhana Dass writes:

“’Choses in action’ or ‘things in action’ are assignable.

Assignment of chose in action take places when the liabilities imposed or the rights acquired under a contract between A and B are transferred to C who is not a party to the original contract.

The expression ‘chose in action’ or ‘thing in action’, in the literal sense, means a thing recoverable by suit or action in law. ...

Rights under a contract of insurance are choses in action.” [130]

As such, it would seem that with regard to property and motor insurance, the assignment or sale of the subject matter of the insurance is insufficient to transfer the insurance policy as well. The insurance company’s consent is required before the policy will change hands. In order for the insured or original policy holder to effect a valid assignment, the insurance company’s consent and resulting assignment of the insurance policy must be contemporaneous with the assignment or sale of the subject matter since once the assignment or sale of the subject matter is complete, the insured no longer has any insurable interest in the subject matter of the insurance and as such, no more insurable interest in the policy to assign.

Nik Ramlah Mahmood explains:

“The contract of insurance itself can only be assigned with the consent of the insurer. This amounts to the substitution of a new contract for the old - a novation - and is allowed under the Contracts Act 1950 [131] . Novation results in the formation of a new contract between the insurer and the assignee and the latter is subject to all the terms and conditions of the new contract and he effectively replaces the assignor as the insured under the policy.” [132]

The assignment of life insurance policies may be effected by the insured through a legal assignment, either under the Policies of Assurance Act 1867 [133] or section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 .

7.2 Assignment of the Proceeds of Insurance Policies

“The proceeds of a policy may be assigned either in equity or at law in accordance with the provisions of section 4(6) of the Civil Law Act [134] . The insured’s right to the proceeds of a policy is a valuable chose in action and it may be assigned either before or after the occurrence of a loss. For an assignment of the proceeds of a policy, which is distinct from an assignment of the contract or policy of insurance, the consent of the insurer is not required.”

In the case of an equitable assignment of the proceeds of the policy, an action to recover the said proceeds must be brought in the name of the insured.

Where the assignor has effected a legal assignment of the proceeds of the policy in accordance with the requirements of section 4(6) of the Civil Law Act, the assignee may sue in his own name. The assignment must be an absolute assignment in writing under the assignor’s hand and express notice of such assignment must be given in writing to the insurers.

The assignee of the proceeds of the policy cannot acquire rights which are superior to those of the assignor. It follows that all the defences which could have been raised by the insurer against the assignor are equally applicable against the assignee. Thus, the insurers may avoid liability on account of the assignor’s misrepresentation or non-disclosure. Furthermore, all terms which are conditions precedent to the insurer’s liability must be complied with and the insurer may avoid liability to the assignee of the proceeds of a policy on the ground of the assignor’s failure to comply with a condition precedent. For instance, in Re Carr & Sun Fire Insurance Co., [135] the insured’s failure to provide the insurer with proof of loss within the time stipulated under the terms of the policy precluded the trustee in bankruptcy from recovering the proceeds of the policy.” [136]

7.3 Assignment of the Subject Matter of Insurance Policies

E. R. Hardy Ivamy writes:

“Before the assignee of the subject-matter can in his own name enforce the contract contained in the policy, it is necessary that the policy should be validly assigned to him... [137]

On the completion of the assignment, the rights and duties of the original assured devolve on the assignee, who becomes, to all intents and purposes, the assured under the policy which he may accordingly enforce in his own name [138] .”

“The question of an assignment of the subject matter of insurance arises when the insured property has been sold or otherwise disposed of by the insured. It does not arise in the case of life and personal accident policies because the subject matter of such policies is unassignable.

An insured who has voluntarily and completely given up his interest in the subject matter of the insurance ceases to have an insurable interest in the insured property. Such an insured can no longer make a claim under the policy with respect to the property which has been given up as he will not be in a position to suffer any loss with regard to the property.” [139]

7.4 Assignment by Operation of Law

The case of Thomas v. National Farmer’s Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd. [140] involved the property in hay and straw on a farm being passed from a tenant to a landlord by virtue of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1948 when the landlord served a notice to quit on his tenant. Diplock J. in this case explained:

“Where property passes automatically as the result of statutory provisions when certain circumstances arise, it seems to me that this is a passing of property by operation of law.” [141]

“The insured’s interest in the policy or in the subject matter of interest may be assigned by operation of law. For instance, such an assignment will occur in the event of the death or bankruptcy of the insured.

As far as the insured’s interest in the insured property is concerned, such interest vests in the insured’s personal representative in the event of the insured’s death. On the other hand, in the event of the bankruptcy of the insured, the insured’s interest in the insured property vests in the Official Assignee. In either of these situations, the continued effectiveness of the policy is not in doubt.

Where a loss occurs before an assignment by operation of law, the insured’s personal representatives or trustee in bankruptcy, as the case may be, has the right to claim against the insurers. The position is more complicated where a loss occurs after an assignment by operation of law and after the property has been distributed to those who are entitled to the same. Most policies avoid such complications by providing that the insurer shall indemnify the insured and all other persons to whom his interest in the insured property may pass by means of a will or by operation of law.” [142]

Myint Soe writes :

“The general principle is that on death and bankruptcy, both the subject matter insured and the policy itself pass to the personal representatives or the Official Assignee, as the case may be.

However, the personal representatives or the Official Assignee cannot have a better title than the deceased or the bankrupt. The claim would be liable to be defeated by any non-disclosure or misrepresentation or breach of condition on the part of the insured before the assignment takes effect.” [143]

“Any person who takes an insurance policy should find out whether there is any special clause prohibiting or restricting assignment. Some policies may prohibit the assignment of the subject matter during the currency of the policy. Some policies may prohibit assignment otherwise than by will or operation of law.” [144]

Kenneth Sutton writes :

“A policy of insurance is or evidences a contract and is therefore, like any other agreement, subject to the general law of contract as developed by the common law and modified by statute. In addition, special rules have been developed in relation to insurance contracts. Thus, they are the most common example of that special class of contract known as contracts uberrimae fidei, that is, of utmost good faith, and hence there are special rules in relation to non-disclosure, misrepresentation and the like in respect of them.” [145]

The legal standing of assignments in the field of insurance, thus, is not a straightforward question to answer. It depends on what is being assigned and how assignments are conducted in the various branches of insurance law.

In practical terms, insurance companies themselves may not be certain of the legal stand of various claimants who clamour at their doors demanding payment on insurance claims arising out of purported assignments. Insurance companies, therefore, may demand these eager voices to prove the validity of their claims in court. The insurance company then, will make payment on the claims as directed by the superior wisdom and authority of the court of law. As Irwin M. Taylor writes:

“Insurance companies are frequently presented with conflicting claims advanced by the original beneficiary and a subsequently designated beneficiary or assignee. Rather than pay to either one at its peril, it is the practice of insurance companies to bring both claimants into a law suit, deposit the money into court and leave the two claimants to fight the matter out themselves.” [146]

A. Vijayalakshmi Venugopal*

[*] Advocate & Solicitor

High Court of Malaya

[1] A. A. Tarr, Kwai-Lian Liew & W. Holligan, Australian Insurance Law , Second Edition, The Law Book Company Limited, 1991, at page 1.

[2] Namely marine, life and fire insurance.

[3] John Lowry & Philip Rawlings, Insurance Law: Doctrines and Principles , Hart Publishing (U.S.A), 1999, at page 3.

[4] Professor K. S. N. Murthy & K. V. S. Sarma, Modern Law of Insurance in India , N. M. Tripathi Private Limited (Bombay, India), 1995, at page 3.

[5] John Birds & Norma J. Hird, Birds’ Modern Insurance Law , Fifth Edition, Sweet & Maxwell (London), 2001, at page 13.

[6] (1881) 18 Ch.D 1.

[7] Ibid 9-10.

[8] Principles of Insurance Law , Fifth Edition, Butterworths Asia, 2000, at page 1193.

[9] R. C. Kohli, An Introduction to Insurance Practice and Principles in Singapore and Malaysia, Singapore Insurance Training Centre, 1982, at page 77.

[10] William Brandt’s Sons & Co. v. Dunlop Rubber Co. (1905) A.C. 454 (House of Lords) per Lord Macnaghten, at page 462.

[11] David Norwood & John P. Weir, Norwood on Life Insurance Law in Canada , Second Edition, Carswell Thomson Professional Publishing, 1993, at page 258.

[12] Malcolm A. Clarke, The Law of Insurance Contracts , Second Edition, Lloyd’s of London Press Ltd, 1994, at page 170.

[13] Act 553.

[14] Act 67 (revised 1972).

[15] This Act is declared to come into force on 7 April 1956.

[16] 30 and 31 Victoria, chapter 144.

[17] 15 and 16 Geo. V., chapter 20.

[18] A ‘chose in action’ has been defined by Erin Goh, Valerie Low and Low Kee Yang (editor) in Butterworths Law for Business Series - Insurance Law , Butterworths Asia, 2001, at page 191 in the following manner, “A chose in action is the right to demand payment of a sum of money or to recover damages under a contract.”

[19] Nik Ramlah Mahmood, Insurance Law in Malaysia , Butterworths, 1992, at pages 207-208.

[20] [1984] 1 MLJ 260 (Federal Court).

[21] Quoted and discussed above.

[22] [1984] 1 MLJ 260 (Federal Court), at page 264.

[23] 6 Edw 7, c. 41 (United Kingdom).

[24] Halsbury’s Statutes of England and Wales, Fourth Edition, Volume 22, 2000 Reissue, Butterworths (London), 2000, at page 42.

[25] Ibid 43.

[26] Robert Merkin (Editor), Colinvaux’s Law of Insurance , Sixth Edition, Sweet & Maxwell (London), 1990, at pages 405-406.

[27] Halsbury’s Statutes of England and Wales, Fourth Edition, Volume 22, 2000 Reissue, Butterworths (London), 2000, at page 25.

[28] Michael Parkington, Nicholas Leigh-Jones, Andrew Longmore & John Birds (Editors), Macgillivray & Parkington on Insurance Law - relating to all risks other than marine, Eighth Edition, Sweet & Maxwell (London), 1988, at pages 714-715.

[29] The cases quoted in support of this proposition in this book, at page 714 are Rayner v. Preston (1881) 18 Ch. D. 1, at page 7 per Cotton L,J, Ecclesiastical Commissioners v. Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation (1895) 11 TLR 476, Robson v. Liverpool, London and Globe Insurance Co. (1900) The Times, June 23, Rogerson v. Scottish Automobile and General Insurance Co. Ltd. (1931) 48 TLR 17, Tattersall v. Drysdale [1935] 2 K.B. 174 and Boss and Hansford v. Kingston [1962] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 431.

[30] The case quoted in support of this proposition, at page 714 of this book is Forbes & Co. v. Border Counties Fire Office (1873) 11 Macph. 278.

[31] The case quoted in support of this proposition in this book, at page 714 is Collingridge v. Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation (1877) 3 QBD 173.

[32] The cases quoted in support of this proposition in this book, at page 715 are Castellain v. Preston (1883) 11 QBD 380, at page 385 per Brett L.J. and A.R. Williams Machinery Co. v. British Crown Assurance Corporation Ltd . (1921) BCR 481.

[33] The case quoted in support of this proposition in this book, at page 715 is the judgment of Bowen L.J. in Castellain v. Preston (1883) 11 Q.B.D. 380, at pages 401 and 405. This author also comments that once the vendor is fully paid, however, his interest will cease and he will be unable to recover as was held in Bank of New South Wales v. North British and Mercantile Insurance Co. (1881) 2 NSWLR 239.

[34] Digby C. Jess, The Insurance of Commercial Risks Law and Practice , Second Edition, Butterworths (London), 1993, at page 15.

[35] (1875) LR 10 QB 249.

[36] (1875) LR 10 QB 249, at page 253.

[37] (1743) 1 Wils. KB 10; 95 ER 463.

[38] (1743) 1 Wils. KB 10, at page 10; 95 ER 463, at page 463.

[39] (1895) 11 TLR 476 (High Court).

[40] Id 476.

[41] (1877) 3 QBD 173.

[42] Ibid 176-177.

[43] Ibid 177.

[44] (1881) 18 Ch.D 1.

[45] Ibid 6.

[46] Ibid 6-7.

[47] (1881) 18 Ch.D 1, at page 11.

[48] Ibid 12.

[49] Ibid 16.

[50] (1883) 11 QBD 380 (Court of Appeal).

[51] (1883) 11 QBD 380 (Court of Appeal), at page 386.

[52] Ibid 393.

[53] Ibid 396-397.

[54] Mahinder Singh Sidhu, Casebook on Motor Insurance Law in Malaysia and Singapore - with synopsis and principles, International Law Book Services, 1995, at page 25.

[55] Ibid 31.

[56] [1938] 2 All ER 267 (Court of Appeal).

[57] Ibid 269.

[58] Ibid 269-270.

[59] Ibid 270.

[60] The equivalent Act in Malaysia is the Road Transport Act 1987 (Act 333).

[61] Refer to section 35 of the United Kingdom Act and section 90 of the Malaysian Act.

[62] Refer to section 10 of the United Kingdom Act and section 91 of the Malaysian Act.

[63] Who was the seller of the car.

[64] [1938] 2 All ER 267 (Court of Appeal), at pages 270-271.

[65] [1963] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 439 (High Court).

[66] [1963] 2 Lloyd’s Rep. 439 (High Court), at page 440.

[67] [1967] 1 MLJ 94 (Federal Court).

[68] Ibid 96.

[69] [1967] 2 MLJ 134 (Federal Court).

[70] Ibid 136.

[71] [1935] 2 KB 174.

[72] Ibid 178.

[73] [1981] 2 MLJ 324 (Federal Court).

[74] This judgment was delivered by Lee Hun Hoe C.J. (Borneo).

[75] [1937] 4 All ER 628 (High Court). Discussed above is the Court of Appeal judgment.

[76] [1981] 2 MLJ 324 (Federal Court), at page 325.

[77] Ibid 325.

[78] S. Santhana Dass, Law of Life Insurance in Malaysia , Alpha Sigma Sdn Bhd, 2000, at page 1.

[79] Robert Merkin (Editor), Colinvaux’s Law of Insurance, Sixth Edition, Sweet & Maxwell (London), 1990, at page 178.

[80] Robert J. Surridge, Sara Forrest, Noleen Dignan, Alison Broadberry & Duncan Backus, Houseman and Davies Law of Life Assurance , Eleventh Edition, Butterworths (London), 1994, at page 1.

[81] Ibid 262

[82] Nik Ramlah Mahmood, Insurance Law in Malaysia , Butterworths, 1992, at page 206.

[83] (1854) 15 CB 365; 139 ER 465.

[84] Ibid page 387; 139 ER 465, at page 474.

[85] (1854) 15 C.B. 365, at page 391; 139 E.R. 465, at page 476.

[86] S. Santhana Dass, Law of Life Insurance in Malaysia , Alpha Sigma Sdn Bhd, 2000, at page 287.

[87] An Act in the United Kingdom.

[88] Robert J. Surridge, Sara Forrest, Noleen Dignan, Alison Broadberry & Duncan Backus, Houseman and Davies Law of Life Assurance , Eleventh Edition, Butterworths (London), 1994, at page 263.

[90] (1888) 40 Ch.D 5.

[91] The Policies of Assurance Act 1867.

[92] (1888) 40 Ch.D 5, at page 10.

[93] Act 56.

[94] This Act came into force in West Malaysia on 7 April 1956.

[95] S. Santhana Dass, Law of Life Insurance in Malaysia , Alpha Sigma Sdn Bhd, 2000, at page 276.

[96] Ibid 281-282.

[97] Robert J. Surridge, Sara Forrest, Noleen Dignan, Alison Broadberry & Duncan Backus, Houseman and Davies Law of Life Assurance , Eleventh Edition, Butterworths (London), 1994, at page 265.

[98] Ray Hodgin, Insurance Law - Text and Materials , Cavendish Publishing Limited (United Kingdom), 1998, at page 63.

[99] [1949] 1 All ER 120 (Court of Appeal).

[100] Ibid 126.

[101] Nik Ramlah Mahmood, Insurance Law in Malaysia , Butterworths, 1992, at pages 206-207.

[102] Tan Lee Meng, Insurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at page 415.

[103] (1917) 1 Ch.D 1 (Court of Appeal).

[104] Ibid 2.

[105] Ibid 7.

[106] Ibid 8.

[107] Ibid 8.

[108] Ibid 7.

[109] (1885) 28 Ch.D 674.

[110] Poh Chu Chai, Principles of Insurance Law , Fifth Edition, Butterworths Asia, 2000, at page 1208.

[111] (1885) 28 Ch.D 674, at pages 680 and 681.

[112] (1878) 9 Ch.D 137.

[113] Ibid 140.

[114] Ibid 141.

[115] Tan Lee Meng, Insurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at page 417.

[116] The authority given in this book, at page D.1.2-04, for this proposition is the case of Re Weniger’s Policy (1910) 2 Ch.D 291.

[117] Robert M. Merkin, Kluwer’s Insurance Contract Law , Croner CCH, 2000, at page D.1.2-04.

[118] S. Santhana Dass, Law of Life Insurance in Malaysia , Alpha Sigma Sdn Bhd, 2000, at page 284.

[119] Act 553.

[120] Francis Tierney & Paul Braithwaite, A Guide to Effective Insurance , Second Edition, Butterworths Canada Ltd., 1992, at page 13.

[121] Ray Hodgin, Insurance Law - Text and Materials , Cavendish Publishing Limited (United Kingdom), 1998, at page 63.

[122] Ibid .

[123] 222 US 149 (1911).

[124] Act 553.

[125] Tan Lee Meng, Insurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at page 411

[126] Ibid 413.

[127] According to footnote 27, at page 413 of this book, prior to the coming into force of the English Policies of Assurance Act 1867, a life policy could only be assigned in equity and not through a legal assignment. The equitable assignee could only sue by

having the assignor of the policy joined as a party to the action.

[128] The equivalent Malaysian provision is section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956

[129] Tan Lee Meng, Insurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at page 413.

[130] S. Santhana Dass, Law of Life Insurance in Malaysia , Alpha Sigma Sdn Bhd, 2000, at page 274

[131] Nik Ramlah Mahmood, at page 209, in footnote number 12 clarifies that she is referring to section 63 of the Contracts Act 1950 (Act 136) in this context which states, “If the parties to a contract agree to substitute a new contract for it, or to rescind or alter it, the original contract need not be performed.”

[132] Nik Ramlah Mahmood, Insurance Law in Malaysia , Butterworths, 1992, at page 209.

[133] If that applies in Malaysia as discussed by Nik Ramlah Mahmood, Insurance Law in Malaysia , Butterworths, 1992, at pages 207-208.

[134] The equivalent Malaysian provision is section 4(3) of the Civil Law Act 1956 (Act 65).

[135] (1897) 13 TLR 186.

[136] Tan Lee Meng, Insurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at pages 410-411

[137] E. R. Hardy Ivamy, General Principles of Insurance Law , Sixth Edition, Butterworths (London), 1993, at page 348.

[138] Ibid 353.

[139] Tan Lee Meng, Insurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at page 407.

[140] [1961] 1 WLR 386.

[141] [1961] 1 WLR 386, at page 392.

[142] Tan Lee Meng, Inssurance Law in Singapore , Second Edition, Butterworths Asia, 1997, at pages 430-431.

[143] Myint Soe, The Insurance Law of Malaysia , Quins Pte. Ltd., 1979, at page 62.

[144] Ibid .

[145] Kenneth Sutton, Insurance Law in Australia , Third Edition, LBC Information Services, 1999, at pages 11-12.

• Search Search Please fill out this field.
• Building Your Business

What Is an Anti-Assignment Clause?

Anti-Assignment Clauses Explained

• Definition and Example

How Anti-Assignment Clauses Work

• State Laws and Anti-Assignment Clauses

Extreme Media / Getty Images

An anti-assignment clause is a provision in an insurance policy that bars the policyholder from transferring their rights under the policy to another party. The clause prohibits the insured from authorizing someone else to file claims, make changes, or take other actions under the policy.

Many  small businesses  purchase insurance policies that contain an anti-assignment clause, which may affect their ability to conduct certain routine business transactions. For instance, if your property is damaged and you hire a contractor to make repairs, the clause may bar you from allowing the contractor to collect loss payments directly from your insurer. In addition, some restrictions found in anti-assignment clauses may be overridden by state laws. Below, we’ll explore further what an anti-assignment clause is and how it works.

Definition and Example of an Anti-Assignment Clause

An anti-assignment clause is language found in an insurance policy that forbids the policyholder from assigning their rights and interests under the policy to someone else without the insurer’s consent. The clause is usually found in the policy conditions section.

Alternate name : Assignment clause, Non-assignment clause

An example of an anti-assignment clause is wording contained in the standard Insurance Services Office (ISO) business owners policy (BOP) . You can find it in the Common Policy Conditions (Section III) under the heading “Transfer of Your Rights and Duties Under This Policy.” The clause states that your rights and duties under the policy may not be transferred without the insurer’s written consent. However, if you are an individual named on the policy and you die, your rights will be transferred to your legal representative.

An anti-assignment clause may not include the word “assignment” but instead refer to a transfer of rights under the policy.

Anti-assignment clauses prevent policyholders from transferring their rights under the policy to someone else without the insurer’s permission. The clauses are designed to protect insurers from unknown risks. Insurers evaluate insurance applicants carefully before they agree to provide coverage. They consider an applicant’s business experience, loss history, and other factors to gauge their susceptibility to claims. When an insurer issues a policy, the premium reflects the insurer’s assessment of the applicant’s risks. If the policyholder transfers their rights under the policy to another party, the insurer’s risk increases. This is because the insurer hasn’t had an opportunity to evaluate the new party’s risks.

The following example demonstrates how an anti-assignment clause in an insurance policy can affect a business.

Theresa is the owner of Tasty Tidbits, a pastry shop she operates out of a commercial building she owns. She has insured her business for liability and property under a business owners policy. Theresa decides to take a one-year sabbatical from her business and asks her friend Ted to manage Tasty Treats during her absence. Theresa signs a contract assigning her rights under Tasty Tidbits’ BOP to Ted.

If a loss occurs, Ted may have no right to file a claim or collect benefits under the policy on Tasty Treats’ behalf. The assignment is barred by the anti-assignment clause in the BOP.

Effect of State Laws on Anti-Assignment Clauses

Many states have enacted laws via a statute or court ruling that override anti-assignment clauses in insurance policies. These laws may invalidate all or a portion of a policy’s anti-assignment provision. While the laws vary, many bar pre-loss assignments but permit assignments made after a loss has occurred. Assignments made before any losses have occurred are prohibited because they increase the insurer’s risks. Post-loss assignments don’t increase the insurer’s risks, so they generally are permitted.

Some states prohibit any assignment of benefits made without the insurer’s consent, whether the assignment occurred before or after a loss.

Here's an example of how a state law can impact an anti-assignment clause in an insurance policy. Suppose that Theresa (in the previous scenario) has returned from her sabbatical and is again operating her business. Tasty Treats is located in a state that bars pre-loss assignments but allows assignments made after a loss has occurred.

Late one night, a fire breaks out in the pastry shop and a portion of the building is damaged. Theresa files a property damage claim under her BOP and hires Rapid Reconstruction, a construction company, to repair the building. At the contractor’s suggestion, Theresa assigns her rights to receive benefits for the claim under the BOP to Rapid Reconstruction. Because Theresa has assigned her rights after a loss has occurred, the assignment is permitted by law and should be accepted by Theresa’s insurer.

Key Takeaways

• Many policies purchased by small businesses contain an anti-assignment clause.
• An anti-assignment clause bars the policyholder from assigning their rights and interests under the policy to someone else without the insurer’s consent.
• Many states have a statute or court ruling that overrides anti-assignment clauses in insurance policies.
• State laws vary, but many prohibit pre-loss assignments yet permit assignments made after a loss has occurred.

Canopy Claims. " Business Owners Coverage Form ," Page 53.

Penn State Law Review. " If You Give a Shop a Claim: The Unsustainable Inequity of Pennsylvania’s Unbridled Post-Loss Assignments ."

Stahl, Davies, Sewell, Chavarria & Friend. " Buyers and Sellers Beware - Assignment of Hurricane Claims May Be Invalid in Texas ."

Assignment in Insurance Policy | Meaning | Explanation | Types

Table of Contents

• 1 What is Assignment in an Insurance Policy?
• 2 Who can make an assignment?
• 3 What happens to the ownership of the policy upon Assignment?
• 4 Can assignment be changed or cancelled?
• 5 What happens if the assignment dies?
• 6 What is the procedure to make an assignment?
• 7 Is it necessary to Inform the insurer about assignment?
• 8 Can a policy be assigned to a minor person?
• 9 Who pays premium when a policy is assigned?
• 10.1 1. Conditional Assignment
• 10.2 2. Absolute Assignment

What is Assignment in an Insurance Policy?

Assignment means a complete transfer of the ownership of the policy to some other person. Usually assignment is done for the purpose of raising a loan from a bank or a financial institution .

Assignment is governed by Section 38 of the Insurance Act 1938 in India. Assignment can also be done in favour of a close relative when the policyholder wishes to give a gift to that relative. Such an assignment is done for “natural love and affection”. An example, a policyholder may assign his policy to his sister who is handicapped.

Who can make an assignment?

A policyholder who has policy on his own life can assign the policy to another person. However, a person to whom a policy has been assigned can reassign the policy to the policyholder or assign it to any other person. A nominee cannot make an assignment of the policy. Similarly, an assignee cannot make a nomination on the policy which is assigned to him.

What happens to the ownership of the policy upon Assignment?

When a policyholder assign a policy, he loses all control on the policy. It is no longer his property. It is now the assignee’s property whether the policyholder is alive or dead, the assignee alone will get the policy money from the insurance company.

If the assignee dies, then his (assignee’s) legal heirs will be entitled to the policy money.

Can assignment be changed or cancelled?

An assignment cannot be changed or cancelled. The assignee can of course, reassign the policy to the policyholder who assigned it to him. He can also assign the policy to any other person because it is now his property. We can think of a bank reassigning the policy to the policyholder when their loan is repaid.

What happens if the assignment dies?

If the assignee dies, the assignment does not get cancelled. The legal heirs of the assignee become entitled to the policy money. Assignment is a legal transfer of all the interests the policyholder has in the policy to the assignee.

What is the procedure to make an assignment?

Assignment can be made only after issue of the policy bond. The policyholder can either write out the wording on the policy bond (endorsement) or write it on a separate paper and get it stamped. (Stamp value is the same, as the stamp required for the policy — Twenty paise per one thousand sum assured). When assignment is made by an endorsement on the policy bond, there is no need for stamp because the policy is already stamped.

Is it necessary to Inform the insurer about assignment?

Yes, it is necessary to give information about assignment to the insurance company. The insurer will register the assignment in its records and from then on recognize the assignee as the owner of the policy. If someone has made more than one assignment, then the date of the notice will decide which assignment has priority. In the case of reassignment also, notice is necessary.

Can a policy be assigned to a minor person?

Assignment can be made in favour of a minor person. But it would be advisable to appoint a guardian to receive the policy money if it becomes due during the minority of the assignee.

Who pays premium when a policy is assigned?

When a policy is assigned normally, the assignee should pay the premium, because the policy is now his property. In practice, however, premium is paid by the assignor (policyholder) himself. When a bank gives a loan and takes the assignment of a policy a security, it will ask the assignor himself to pay the premium and keep it in force. In the case of an assignment as a gift, the assignor would like to pay the premium because he has gifted the policy.

Types of assignment

Assignment may take two forms:

• Conditional Assignment.
• Absolute Assignment.

1. Conditional Assignment

It would be useful where the policyholder desires the benefit of the policy to go to a near relative in the event of his earlier death. It is usually effected for consideration of natural love and affection. It generally provides for the right to revert the policyholder in the event of the assignee predeceasing the policyholder or the policyholder surviving to the date of maturity.

2. Absolute Assignment

This assignment is generally made for valuable consideration. It has the effect of passing the title in the policy absolutely to the assignee and the policyholder in no way retains any interest in the policy. The absolute assignee can deal with the policy in any manner he likes and may assign or transfer his interest to another person.

Related Posts

• Privacy Policy

When you use our links to buy products, we may earn a fee but that in no way affects our editorial independence.

What Is Split-Dollar Life Insurance?

Split-dollar life insurance refers to a permanent life insurance policy held by two parties, usually an employer and employee, who split the premiums and the proceeds of the policy.

Table of Contents

What Is a Split-Dollar Life Insurance Policy?

How does split-dollar life insurance work.

• How Much Does It Cost?

Key Takeaways:

• With a split-dollar life insurance policy, two parties split the cost of the premiums and share the policy benefits.
• Employers may use a split-dollar life insurance policy to attract and retain employees.
• Individuals with high-value estates can purchase a split-dollar life insurance policy to help reduce estate taxes for their beneficiaries.

A split-dollar life insurance policy is a policy wherein two parties share the premium costs as well as the policy benefits. Most often, a split-dollar insurance policy is held between an employer and an employee. Employers sometimes purchase these policies as part of a benefits package to attract and retain high-value employees.

However, they also could provide valuable funds in the event the employee dies. For instance, the funds could add much-needed capital to business operations if a CEO dies, leading to a decrease in stock prices. At the same time, the employee’s portion of the death benefit could aid their family following the loss of their income.

Not as common following a 2003 IRS ruling that said only privately owned companies can loan money to their executives, a split-dollar life insurance policy works in two different ways with regard to the purchase, premiums, any cash value, and the beneficiaries.

Collateral Assignment/Loan Regime

With a collateral assignment/loan regime, the employee owns the policy. This is also sometimes referred to as a leveraged split-dollar plan. The employer loans the premium amount to the employee to pay the premiums. Depending on the terms of the loan, the employee has to pay on taxable income derived from the premium loan. If the employee departs the company or the work agreement expires, the employee repays the loan for the premium costs and owns the policy in its entirety. If the employee dies, the employer receives the loan balance from the death benefit with the remaining going to the beneficiary.

Not all companies can participate in this type of split-dollar life insurance structure as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act made it illegal for a public company to loan money to its executives.

Endorsement Agreement

With an endorsement agreement, the employer owns the policy and the employee chooses the beneficiary. The employer pays the premiums, which are considered taxable income for the employee as is any of the employee’s interest in the policy’s cash value. If the employee leaves the company, the employer can transfer the policy to them or give them the option to purchase it. In the event of the employee’s death, the employer receives either the amount equal to the premiums paid or the policy’s cash value, whichever is greater. The employee’s beneficiary receives the remaining balance of the death benefit.

How Much Does a Split-Dollar Life Insurance Policy Insurance Cost?

As with all insurance policies, there are several factors that determine the cost of a split-dollar life insurance policy. These include:

• Type and amount of coverage. The more purchased, the higher the premiums are.
• The health, age, and gender of the insured . In general, if you are relatively young and healthy you will pay less for the same amount of coverage than someone older and with health issues. Women also typically pay less for life insurance than men.
• Amount of any deferred compensation the employer includes with the policy . 
• The cash value potential of the policy . If the policy allows you to add the cash value to the death benefit, the premiums will be higher than if the cash value is separate from the death benefit.

Find the best life insurance for you

Get free quotes and compare life insurance policies without your contact information.

How Do I Buy Split-Dollar Life Insurance?

When purchasing a split-dollar life insurance policy through an agreement between an employer and employee, both parties need to agree on the type of policy they want. Next, they need to agree on the terms, such as who will own the policy, how long the agreement will last, and who the beneficiaries are. These terms need to be outlined in a written document and signed by both parties.

The employer and employee will complete and sign an application for the life insurance policy. If necessary, the employee will undergo a medical exam. Once the insurance policy application is approved, both parties follow the agreement for payment and management of the split-dollar life insurance policy.

Individuals also have the option to purchase a split-dollar life insurance policy as part of their estate planning. Wealthy individuals can purchase a private split-dollar life insurance policy with the benefits going into a tax-advantaged trust known as an irrevocable life insurance trust (ILIT). Because an ILIT is not considered part of the estate, taxes will not have to be paid on the funds.

When considering a split-dollar life insurance policy, it’s important to speak to a financial advisor or estate planner to determine if it’s the right choice for your financial future.

Between employers and employees, there are three ways for a split-dollar life insurance agreement to end. The first is if the employee leaves the company, the employer could terminate the agreement. The second is if there is a specified termination date in the agreement. The third is if the employee dies, and the death benefit is disbursed as agreed.

Whether employee-owned or employer-owned, the employee can name the beneficiary of the life insurance policy under a split-dollar life insurance agreement. However, the beneficiaries likely will not receive the entire death benefit of the policy. Under a collateral agreement, the death benefit is first used to repay the loan to the employer for the premiums, with the remaining balance going to the beneficiaries. Under an endorsement agreement, the death benefit is first used to repay the policy premiums or cash value, whichever is greater, to the employer. The remaining balance goes to the beneficiary or beneficiaries.

Both the employer and employee can benefit from a split-dollar life insurance agreement. Employer benefits could include:

• Protecting the company’s finances in the event it loses a high-value employee
• Attracting and retaining quality employees
• Low costs to purchase and maintain 
• Can recoup investment when agreement ends
• Flexibility in plan design to meet employer needs

Potential employee benefits include:

• Employer pays for life insurance premiums
• Employer may pay income tax expenses through a bonus 
• Could receive tax-free income through withdrawals and loans of cash value
• Beneficiaries won’t pay taxes on the death benefit 
• Flexibility in the plan design to tailor to employee needs

The policyholder of a split-dollar insurance agreement depends on the type of agreement made between the employer and the employee. For a collateral agreement, the employee is the policyholder of the agreement. For an endorsement agreement, the employer is the policyholder.

Other Life Insurance Companies

• Banner Life
• Colonial Penn
• Corebridge Financial
• Guardian Life
• John Hancock
• Lincoln Financial Group
• Mutual of Omaha
• New York Life
• Northwestern Mutual
• Pacific Life
• Principal Financial
• Transamerica

Best Life Insurance by State

• Best Life Insurance in Alabama
• Best Life Insurance in Arizona
• Best Life Insurance in California
• Best Life Insurance in Colorado
• Best Life Insurance in Delaware
• Best Life Insurance in Florida
• Best Life Insurance in Georgia
• Best Life Insurance in Illinois
• Best Life Insurance in Indiana
• Best Life Insurance in Kansas
• Best Life Insurance in Massachusetts
• Best Life Insurance in Michigan
• Best Life Insurance in Minnesota
• Best Life Insurance in New York
• Best Life Insurance in Ohio
• Best Life Insurance in Oregon
• Best Life Insurance in Tennessee
• Best Life Insurance in Texas
• Best Life Insurance in Virginia
• Best Life Insurance in Washington
• Best Life Insurance Companies
• Cheapest Life Insurance Companies
• Best Term Life Insurance Companies
• Best Whole Life Insurance Companies
• Best Universal Life Insurance Companies
• Best No-Exam Life Insurance Companies
• Life Insurance Quotes
• What Is Term Life Insurance?
• What Is Whole Life Insurance?
• What Is Universal Life Insurance?
• What Is No Exam Life Insurance?
• How Does Life Insurance Work?
• How to Buy Life Insurance
• Insurance Glossary
• Best Homeowners Insurance Companies
• Best Car Insurance Companies
• Best Motorcycle Insurance Companies
• Best RV Insurance Companies
• Best Renters Insurance Companies
• Best Pet Insurance Companies
• Best Small Business Insurance Companies

Why You Can Trust Us: 28 Life Insurance Companies Researched

Assignment under Insurance Policies

By J Mandakini, NUALS

Editor’s Note: This paper attempts to explore the concept of assignment under Indian law especially Contract Act, Insurance Act and Transfer of Property Act. It seeks to appreciate why the assignment is made use of for securities of a facility sanctioned by ICICI Bank. Also, it explains how ICICI Bank faces certain problems in executing the same. 

INTRODUCTION

For any facility sanctioned by a lender, collateral is always deposited to secure the same. Such mere deposition will not suffice, the borrower has to explicitly permit the lender to recover from the borrower, such securities in case of his default.

This is done by the concept of assignment, dealt with adequately in Indian law. Assignment of obligations is always a tricky matter and needs to be dealt with carefully. The Bank should not fall short of any legally permitted lengths to ensure the same. This is why ambiguity in its security documents have to be rectified. 

This paper attempts to explore the concept of assignment in contract law. It seeks to appreciate why the assignment is made use of for securities of a facility sanctioned by ICICI Bank. The next section will deal with how ICICI Bank faces certain problems in executing the same. The following sections will talk about possible risks involved, as well as defenses and solutions to the same.

WHAT IS ASSIGNMENT?

Assignment refers to the transfer of certain or all (depending on the agreement) rights to another party. The party which transfers its rights is called an assignor, and the party to whom such rights are transferred is called an assignee. Assignment only takes place after the original contract has been made. As a general rule, assignment of rights and benefits under a contract may be done freely, but the assignment of liabilities and obligations may not be done without the consent of the original contracting party.

The liability on a contract cannot be transferred so as to discharge the person or estate of the original contractor unless the creditor agrees to accept the liability of another person instead of the first. [i]

Illustration

P agrees to sell his car to Q for Rs. 100. P assigns the right to receive the Rs. 100 to S. This may be done without the consent of Q. This is because Q is receiving his car, and it does not particularly matter to him, to whom the Rs. 100 is being handed as long as he is being absolved of his liability under the contract. However, notice may still be required to be given. Without such notice, Q would pay P, in spite of the fact that such right has been assigned to S. S would be a sufferer in such case.

In this case, that condition is being fulfilled since P has assigned his right to S. However, P may not assign S to be the seller. P cannot just transfer his duties under the contract to another. This is because Q has no guarantee as to the condition of S’s car. P entered into the contract with Q on the basis of the merits of P’s car, or any other personal qualifications of P. Such assignment may be done with the consent of all three parties – P, Q, S, and by doing this, P is absolved of his liabilities under the contract.

 1.1. Effect of Assignment

Immediately on the execution of an assignment of an insurance policy, the assignor forgoes all his rights, title and interest in the policy to the assignee. The premium or loan interest notices etc. in such cases will be sent to the assignee. [ii] However, the existence of obligations must not be assumed, when it comes to the assignment. It must be accompanied by evidence of the same. The party asserting such a personal obligation must prove the existence of an express assumption by clear and unequivocal proof. [iii]

 Assignment of a contract to a third party destroys the privity of contract between the initial contracting parties. New privity is created between the assignee and the original contracting party. In the illustration mentioned above, the original contracting parties were P and Q. After the assignment, the new contracting parties are Q and S.

 1.2. Revocation of Assignment

Assignment, once validly executed, can neither be revoked nor canceled at the option of the assignor. To do so, the insurance policy will have to be reassigned to the original assignor (the insured).

 1.3. Exceptions to Assignment

There are some instances where the contract cannot be assigned to another.

• Express provisions in the contract as to its non-assignability – Some contracts may include a specific clause prohibiting assignment. If that is so, then such a contract cannot be assigned. Assignability is the rule and the contrary is an exception. [iv]

Pensions, PFs, military benefits etc. Illustration

 1.4. enforcing a contract of assignment.

From the day on which notice is given to the insurer, the assignee becomes the beneficiary of the policy even though the assignment is not registered immediately. It does not wait until the giving of notice of the transfer to the insurer. [vi] However, no claims may lie against the insurer until and unless notice of such assignment is delivered to the insurer.

If notice of assignment is not provided to the obligor, he is discharged if he pays to the assignor. Assignee would have to recover from the assignor. However, if the obligor pays the assignor in spite of the notice provided to him, he would still be liable to the assignee.

The following two illustrations make the point amply clear:

Illustrations

1. Seller A assigns its right to payment from buyer X to bank B. Neither A nor B gives notice to X. When payment is due, X pays A. This payment is fully valid and X is discharged. It will be up to B to recover it from A

2. Seller A assigns to bank B its right to payment from buyer X. B immediately gives notice of the assignment to X. When payment is due, X still pays A. X is not discharged and B is entitled to oblige X to pay a second time.

An assignee doesn’t stand in better shoes than those of his assignor. Thus, if there is any breach of contract by the obligor to the assignee, the latter can recover from the former only the same amount as restricted by counter claims, set offs or liens of the assignor to the obligor.

The acknowledgment of notice of assignment is conclusive proof of, and evidence enough to entertain a suit against an assignor and the insurer respectively who haven’t honoured the contract of assignment.

1.5. Assignment under various laws in India

There is no separate law in India which deals with the concept of assignment. Instead, several laws have codified it under different laws. Some of them have been discussed as follows:

1.5.1. Under the Indian Contract Act

There is no express provision for the assignment of contracts under the Indian Contract Act. Section 37 of the Act provides for the duty of parties of a contract to honour such contract (unless the need for the same has been done away with). This is how the Act attempts to introduce the concept of assignment into Indian commercial law. It lays down a general responsibility on the “representatives” of any parties to a contract that may have expired before the completion of the contract. (Illustrations to Section 37 in the Act).

An exception to this may be found from the contract, e.g. contracts of a personal nature. Representatives of a deceased party to a contract cannot claim privity to that contract while refusing to honour such contract. Under this Section, “representatives” would also include within its ambit, transferees and assignees. [vii]

Section 41 of the Indian Contract Act applies to cases where a contract is performed by a third party and not the original parties to the contract. It applies to cases of assignment. [viii] A promisee accepting performance of the promise from a third person cannot afterwards enforce it against the promisor. [ix] He cannot attain double satisfaction of its claim, i.e., from the promisor as well as the third party which performed the contract. An essential condition for the invocation of this Section is that there must be actual performance of the contract and not of a substituted promise.

  1.5.2. Under the Insurance Act

The creation of assignment of life insurance policies is provided for, under Section 38 of the Insurance Act, 1938.

• When the insurer receives the endorsement or notice, the fact of assignment shall be recorded with all details (date of receipt of notice – also used to prioritise simultaneous claims, the name of assignee etc). Upon request, and for a fee of an amount not exceeding Re. 1, the insurer shall grant a written acknowledgment of the receipt of such assignment, thereby conclusively proving the fact of his receipt of the notice or endorsement. Now, the insurer shall recognize only the assignee as the legally valid party entitled to the insurance policy.

 1.5.3. Under the Transfer of Property Act

Indian law as to assignment of life policies before the Insurance Act, 1938 was governed by Sections 130, 131, 132 and 135 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882 under Chapter VIII of the Act – Of Transfers of Actionable Claims. Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act states that nothing contained in that Section is to affect Section 38 of the Insurance Act.

 I) Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act

An actionable claim may be transferred only by fulfilling the following steps:

• Signed by a transferor (or his authorized agent)

The transfer will be complete and effectual as soon as such an instrument is executed. No particular form or language has been prescribed for the transfer. It does not depend on giving notice to the debtor.

The proviso in the section protects a debtor (or other person), who, without knowledge of the transfer pays his creditor instead of the assignee. As long as such payment was without knowledge of the transfer, such payment will be a valid discharge against the transferee. When the transfer of any actionable claim is validly complete, all rights and remedies of transferor would vest now in the transferee. Existence of an instrument in writing is a sine qua non of a valid transfer of an actionable claim. [x]

 II) Section 131 of the Transfer Of Property Act

This Section requires the notice of transfer of actionable claim, as sent to the debtor, to be signed by the transferor (or by his authorized agent), and if he refuses to sign it, a signature by the transferee (or by his authorized agent). Such notice must state both the name and address of the transferee. This Section is intended to protect the transferee, to receive from the debtor. The transfer does not bind a debtor unless the transferor (or transferee, if transferor refuses) sends him an express notice, in accordance with the provisions of this Section.

III) Section 132 of the Transfer Of Property Act

This Section addresses the issue as to who should undertake the obligations under the transfer, i.e., who will discharge the liabilities of the transferor when the transfer has been made complete – would it be the transferor himself or the transferee, to whom the rest of the surviving contract, so to speak, has been transferred.

This Section stipulates, that the transferee himself would fulfill such obligations. However, where an actionable claim is transferred with the stipulation in the contract that transferor himself should discharge the liability, then such a provision in the contract will supersede Ss 130 and 132 of this Act. Where the insured hypothecates his life insurance policies and stipulates that he himself would pay the premiums, the transferee is not bound to pay the premiums. [xi]

FACILITIES SECURED BY INSURANCE POLICIES – HOW ASSIGNMENT COMES INTO THE PICTURE

Many banks require the borrower to take out or deposit an insurance policy as security when they request a personal loan or a business loan from that institution. The policy is used as a way of securing the loan, ensuring that the bank will have the facility repaid in the event of either the borrower’s death or his deviations from the terms of the facility agreement.

Along with the deposit of the insurance policy, the policyholder will also have to assign the benefits of the policy to the financial institution from which he proposes to avail a facility. The mere deposit, without writing, or passing of any document of title to such a claim, does not create any equitable charge. [xii]

ETHICS OF ASSIGNING LIFE INSURANCE POLICY TO LENDERS

The purpose of taking out a life insurance policy on oneself, is that in the event of an untimely death, near and dear ones of the deceased are not left high and dry, and that they would have something to fall back on during such traumatic times. Depositing and assigning the rights under such policy document to another, would mean that there is a high chance that benefits of life insurance would vest in such other, in the event of unfortunate death and the family members are prioritized only second. These are not desirable circumstances where the family would be forced to cope with the death of their loved one coupled with the financial crisis.

 Thus, there is a need to examine the ethics of:

• The bank accepting such assignment

The customer should be cautious before assigning his rights under life insurance policies. By “cautious”, it is only meant that he and his dependents and/or legal heirs should be aware of the repercussions of the act of assigning his life insurance policy. It is conceded that no law prohibits the assignment of life insurance policies.

In fact, Section 38 of the Insurance Act, 1938 , provides for such assignments. Judicial cases have held life insurance policies as property more than a social welfare measure. [xiii] Further, the bank has no personal relationship with any customer and thus has no moral obligation to not accept such assignments of life insurance.

However, the writer is of the opinion that, in dealing with the assignment of life insurance policies, utmost care and caution must be taken by the insured when assigning his life insurance policy to anyone else.

CURRENT STAND OF ICICI REGARDING FACILITIES SECURED BY INSURANCE POLICY, WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO ASSIGNMENT OF OBLIGATIONS

This Section seeks to address and highlight the manner in which ICICI Bank drafts its security documents with regard to the assignment of obligations. The texts placed in quotes in the subsequent paragraphs are verbatim extracts from the security document as mentioned.

Composite Document for Corporate and Realty Funding

 “ 8 .   CHARGING CLAUSE

  The Mortgagor doth hereby:

iii) Assign and transfer unto the Mortgagee all the Bank Accounts and all rights, title, interest, benefits, claims and demands whatsoever of the Mortgagor in, to, under and in respect of the Bank Accounts and all monies including all cash flows and receivables and all proceeds arising from Projects and Other Projects_______________, insurance proceeds, which have been deposited / credited / lying in the Bank Accounts, all records, investments, assets, instruments and securities which represent all amounts in the Bank Accounts, both present and future (the “Account Assets”, which expression shall, as the context may permit or require, mean any or each of such Account Assets) to have and hold the same unto and to the use of the Mortgagee absolutely and subject to the powers and provisions herein contained and subject also to the proviso for redemption hereinafter mentioned;

(v) Assign and transfer unto the Mortgagee all right, title, interest, benefit, claims and demands whatsoever of the Mortgagors, in, to, under and/or in respect of the Project Documents (including insurance policies) including, without limitation, the right to compel performance thereunder, and to substitute, or to be substituted for, the Mortgagor thereunder, and to commence and conduct either in the name of the Mortgagor or in their own names or otherwise any proceedings against any persons in respect of any breach of, the Project Documents and, including without limitation, rights and benefits to all amounts owing to, or received by, the Mortgagor and all claims thereunder and all other claims of the Mortgagor under or in any proceedings against all or any such persons and together with the right to further assign any of the Project Documents, both present and future, to have and to hold all and singular the aforesaid assets, rights, properties, etc. unto and to the use of the Mortgagee absolutely and subject to the powers and provisions contained herein and subject also to the proviso for redemption hereinafter mentioned.”

 ICICI Bank’s Standard Terms and Conditions Governing Consumer Durable Loans

  “ insurance.

The Borrower further agrees that upon any monies becoming due under the policy, the same shall be paid by the Insurance Company to ICICI Bank without any reference / notice to the Borrower, but not exceeding the principal amount outstanding under the Insurance Policy. The Borrower specifically acknowledges that in all cases of claim, the Insurance Company will be solely liable for settlement of the claim, and he/she will not hold ICICI Bank responsible in any manner whether for compensation, recovery of compensation, processing of claims or for any reason whatsoever.

Reference has been made only to assignment of assets, rights, benefits, interests, properties etc. No specific reference has been made to the assignment of obligations of the assignor under such insurance contract.

THE ISSUE FACED BY ICICI BANK

Where ICICI Bank accepts insurance policy documents of customers as security for a loan, in the light of the fact that the documents are silent about the question of assignment of obligations, are they assigned to ICICI Bank? Where there is hypothecation of a life insurance policy, with a stipulation that the mortgagor (assignor) should pay the premiums, and that the mortgagee (assignee) is not bound to pay the same, Sections 130 and 132 do not apply to such cases. [xiv] With rectification of this issue, ICICI Bank can concretize its hold over the securities with no reservations about its legality.

RISKS INVOLVED

This section of the paper attempts to explore the many risks that ICICI Bank is exposed to, or other factors which worsen the situation, due to the omission of a clause detailing the assignment of obligations by ICICI Bank.

Practices of Other Companies

The practices of other companies could be a risk factor for ICICI Bank in the light of the fact that some of them expressly exclude assignment of obligations in their security documents.

There are some companies whose notice of assignment forms contain an exclusive clause dealing with the assignment of obligations. It states that while rights and benefits accruing out of the insurance policy are to be assigned to the bank, obligations which arise out of such policy documents will not be liable to be performed by the bank. Thus, they explicitly provide for the only assignment of rights and benefits and never the assignment of obligations.

Possible Obligation to Insurance Companies

By not clearing up this issue, ICICI Bank could be held to be obligated to the insurance company from whom the assignor took the policy, for example, with respect to insurance premiums which were required to be paid by the assignor. This is not a desirable scenario for ICICI Bank. In case of default by the assignor in the terms of the contract, the right of ICICI Bank over the security deposited (insurance policy in question) could be fraught in the legal dispute.

Possible litigation

Numerous suits may be instituted against ICICI Bank alleging a violation of the Indian Contract Act. Some examples include allegations of concealment of fact, fraud etc. These could be enough to render the existing contract of assignment voidable or even void.

Contra Proferentem

This doctrine applies in a situation when a provision in the contract can be interpreted in more than one way, thereby creating ambiguities. It attempts to provide a solution to interpreting vague terms by laying down, that a party which drafts and imposes an ambiguous term should not benefit from that ambiguity. Where there is any doubt or ambiguity in the words of an exclusion clause, the words are construed more forcibly against the party putting forth the document, and in favour of the other party. [xv]

The doctrine of contra proferentem attempts to protect the layman from the legally knowledgeable companies which draft standard forms of contracts, in which the former stands on a much weaker footing with regard to bargaining power with the latter. This doctrine has been used in interpreting insurance contracts in India. [xvi]

If litigation ensues as a result of this uncertainty, there are high chances that the Courts will tend to favour the assignor and not the drafter of the documents.

POSSIBLE DEFENSES AGAINST DISPUTES FOR THE SECURITY DOCUMENTS AS THEY ARE NOW

This section of the paper attempts to give defences which the Bank may raise in case of any disputes arising out of silence on the matter of assignability of obligations.

Interpretation of the Security Documents

UNIDROIT principles expressly provide a method for interpretation of contracts. [xvii] The method consists of utilizing the following factors:

This defence relates to the concept of estoppel embodied in Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. According to the Section, when one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representatives, to deny the truth of that thing.

If a man either by words or by conduct has intimated that he consents to an act which has been done and that he will not offer any opposition to it, and he thereby induces others to do that which they otherwise might have abstained from, he cannot question legality of the act he had sanctioned to the prejudice of those who have so given faith to his words or to the fair inference to be drawn from his conduct. [xviii] Subsequent conduct may be relevant to show that the contract exists, or to show variation in the terms of the contract, or waiver, or estoppel. [xix]

Where the meaning of the instrument is ambiguous, a statement subsequently interpreting such instrument is admissible. [xx] In the present case, where the borrower has never raised any claims with regard to non assignability of obligations on him, and has consented to the present conditions and relations with ICICI Bank, he cannot he cannot be allowed to raise any claims with respect to the same.

Internationally, the doctrine of post contractual conduct is invoked for such disputes. It refers to the acts of parties to a contract after the commencement of the contract. It stipulates that where a party has behaved in a particular manner, so as to induce the other party to discharge its obligations, even if there has been a variation from the terms of the contract, the first party cannot cite such variation as a reason for its breach of the contract.

Where the parties to a contract are both under a common mistake as to the meaning or effect of it, and therefore embark on a course of dealing on the footing of that mistake, thereby replacing the original terms of the contract by a conventional basis on which they both conduct their affairs, then the original contract is replaced by the conventional basis. The parties are bound by the conventional basis. Either party can sue or be sued upon it just as if it had been expressly agreed between them. [xxi]

The importance of consensus ad idem has been concretized by various case laws in India. Further, if the stipulations and terms are uncertain and the parties are not ad idem there can be no specific performance, for there was no contract at all. [xxii]

In the present case, the minds of the assignor and assignee can be said to have not met while entering into the assignment. The assignee never had any intention of undertaking any obligations of the assignor. In Hartog v Colin & Shields, [xxiii] the defendants made an offer to the plaintiffs to sell hare skins, offering to a pay a price per pound instead of per piece.

AVOIDING THESE RISKS

To concretize ICICI Bank’s stand on the assignment of obligations in the matter of loans secured by insurance policies, the relevant security documents could be amended to include such a clause.

For instances where loans are secured by life insurance policies, a standard set by the American Banker’s Association (ABA) has been followed by many Indian commercial institutions as well. [xxvi] The ABA is a trade association in the USA representing banks ranging from the smallest community bank to the largest bank holding companies. ABA’s principal activities include lobbying, professional development for member institutions, maintenance of best practices and industry standards, consumer education, and distribution of products and services. [xxvii]

There are several ICICI security documents which have included clauses denying any assignment of obligations to it. An extract of the deed of hypothecation for vehicle loan has been reproduced below:

“ 3. In further pursuance of the Loan Terms and for the consideration aforesaid, the Hypothecator hereby further agrees, confirms, declares and undertakes with the Bank as follows:

(i)(a) The Hypothecator shall at its expenses keep the Assets in good and marketable condition and, if stipulated by the Bank under the Loan Terms, insure such of the Assets which are of insurable nature, in the joint names of the Hypothecator and the Bank against any loss or damage by theft, fire, lightning, earthquake, explosion, riot, strike, civil commotion, storm, tempest, flood, erection risk, war risk and such other risks as may be determined by the Bank and including wherever applicable, all marine, transit and other hazards incidental to the acquisition, transportation and delivery of the relevant Assets to the place of use or installation. The Hypothecator shall deliver to the Bank the relevant policies of insurance and maintain such insurance throughout the continuance of the security of these presents and deliver to the Bank the renewal receipts / endorsements / renewed policies therefore and till such insurance policies / renewal policies / endorsements are delivered to the Bank, the same shall be held by the Hypothecator in trust for the Bank. The Hypothecator shall duly and punctually pay all premia and shall not do or suffer to be done or omit to do or be done any act, which may invalidate or avoid such insurance. In default, the Bank may (but shall not be bound to) keep in good condition and render marketable the relevant Assets and take out / renew such insurance. Any premium paid by the Bank and any costs, charges and expenses incurred by the Bank shall forthwith on receipt of a notice of demand from the Bank be reimbursed by the Hypothecator and/or Borrower to the Bank together with interest thereon at the rate for further interest as specified under the Loan Terms, from the date of payment till reimbursement thereof and until such reimbursement, the same shall be a charge on the Assets…”

The inclusion of such a clause in all security documents of the Bank can avoid the problem of assignability of obligations in insurance policies used as security for any facility sanctioned by it.

An assignment of securities is of utmost importance to any lender to secure the facility, without which the lender will not be entitled to any interest in the securities so deposited.

In this paper, one has seen the need for assignment of securities of a facility. Risks involved in not having a separate clause dealing with non assignability of obligations have been discussed. Certain defences which ICICI Bank may raise in case of the dispute have also been enumerated along with solutions to the same.

Formatted by March 2nd, 2019.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[i] J.H. Tod v. Lakhmidas , 16 Bom 441, 449

[ii] http://www.licindia.in/policy_conditions.htm#12, last visited 30 th June, 2014

[iii] Headwaters Construction Co. Ltd. v National City Mortgage Co. Ltd., 720 F. Supp. 2d 1182 (D. Idaho 2010)

[iv] Indian Contract Act and Specific Relief Act, Mulla, Vol. I, 13 th Edn., Reprint 2010, p 968

[v] Khardah Co. Ltd. v. Raymond & Co ., AIR 1962 SC 1810: (1963) 3 SCR 183

[vi] Principles of Insurance Law, M.N. Srinivasan, 8 th Edn., 2006, p. 857

[vii] Ram Baran v Ram Mohit , AIR 1967 SC 744: (1967) 1 SCR 293

[viii] Sri Sarada Mills Ltd. v Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 281

[ix] Lala Kapurchand Godha v Mir Nawah Himayatali Khan, [1963] 2 SCR 168

[x] Velayudhan v Pillaiyar, 9 Mad LT 102 (Mad)

[xi] Hindustan Ideal Insurance Co. Ltd. v Satteya, AIR 1961 AP 183

[xii] Mulraj Khatau v Vishwanath, 40 IA 24 – Respondent based his claim on a mere deposit of the policy and not under a written transfer and claimed that a charge had thus been created on the policy.

[xiii] Insure Policy Plus Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. v The Life Insurance Corporation of India, 2007(109)BOMLR559

[xiv] Transfer of Property Act, Sanjiva Row, 7 th Edn., 2011, Vol II, Universal Law Publishing Company, New Delhi

[xv] Ghaziabad Development Authority v Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 2003

[xvi] United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v M/s. Pushpalaya Printers, [2004] 3 SCR 631, General Assurance Society Ltd. v Chandumull Jain & Anr., [1966 (3) SCR 500]

[xvii] UNIDROIT Principles, Art 4.3

[xviii] B.L.Sreedhar & Ors. v K.M. Munireddy & Ors., 2002 (9) SCALE 183

[xix] James Miller & Partners Ltd. v Whitworth Street Estates (Manchester) Ltd., [1970] 1 All ER 796 (HL)

[xx] Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v State of Gujarat, AIR 1975 SC 32

[xxi] Amalgamated Investment & Property Co. Ltd. v Texas Commerce International Bank Ltd., [1981] 1 All ER 923

[xxii] Smt. Mayawanti v Smt. Kaushalya Devi, 1990 SCR (2) 350

[xxiii] [1939] 3 All ER 566

[xxiv] Terrell v Alexandria Auto Co., 12 La.App. 625

[xxv] http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/CISG25/Pamboukis.pdf, last visited on 30 th June, 2014

[xxvi] https://www.phoenixwm.phl.com/shared/eforms/getdoc.jsp?DocId=525.pdf, last visited on 30 th June, 2014

[xxvii] http://www.aba.com/About/Pages/default.aspx, last visited on 30 th June, 2014

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Give it a try, you can unsubscribe anytime :)

Thanks, I’m not interested

• Best for customer satisfaction
• Best for term life insurance
• Best for retirement planning
• Best for end-of-life care
• Best for flexibility
• Best for universal life
• Best for guaranteed issue

How we review life insurance for seniors

Best life insurance for seniors of april 2024.

Affiliate links for the products on this page are from partners that compensate us (see our advertiser disclosure with our list of partners for more details). However, our opinions are our own. See how we rate insurance products to write unbiased product reviews.

The right life insurance policy for you is one that is purchased early, because your need for life insurance grows as you age, as do your premiums. Many retirees start thinking seriously about life insurance to pay for funeral or to help take care of their family. However, even if you're late to purchasing life insurance, you still have options. 

Best for customer satisfaction: State Farm

Bundling is standard, and agents often quote with multiple discounts.

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Best in JD Power customer service ratings
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Company offers a range of different insurance products to meet buyer needs
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Agents are knowledgeable about its products
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Life insurance products are conservative and limited
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Buyers may be subject to multi-year waiting periods before they qualify for full payouts on life insurance policies
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. State Farm agents cannot offer alternative options if State Farm is unable to bind a life insurance policy

State Farm is one of the insurance industry's most prominent insurers offering auto, home, and other insurance. Bundling is standard, and agents often quote with multiple discounts. Its term, universal, and whole life insurance products are no exception.

• Life insurance products include term and permanent life
• Ranks highly for customer satisfaction

State Farm Life Insurance takes the top spot in JD Power's life insurance customer satisfaction study . JD Power gathers thousands of consumer reviews and gives each insurer a score out of 1,000. State Farm offers a range of insurance products, including auto, life, pet, homeowners, and renters, with multi-policy discounts and other incentives to keep your insurance there.

Some policies exclude seniors over age 65 from applying for the first time. But all life insurance policies are quoted by licensed insurance agents employed by State Farm. Meeting with a State Farm agent allows buyers to communicate goals and needs and answer critical questions agents might have. In addition, qualifying seniors can access limited whole, term, and universal life policies. State Farm is among the companies also offering survivorship universal options. Essentially, spouses can get insured together, and a surviving spouse can continue to make payments and increase the death benefit. Both spouses can also take out loans and other withdrawals against the policy once they meet the requirements.

K of Clewiston, FL, a verified reviewer on ConsumerAffairs , said, "State Farm is the best insurance company out there. They have great Life Insurance Policies to fit your needs…..Also, their prices are the most reasonable out there."

Read our State Farm Life Insurance review here.

Best for term life insurance: Mutual of Omaha

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. diverse whole and term life insurance options
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Strong financial ratings and company history
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Wide range of riders to customize plans
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. online applications not available for term applicants
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. May not provide strong investment options for retirement

Mutual of Omaha Life Insurance  remains one of the industry's most stable life insurance companies. Its size allows it to be more flexible in its underwriting for specific populations, including seniors. Regardless of your age, a licensed insurance agent can sort through your options and find one that makes sense.

However, its term life insurance policy stands out for seniors applying for the first time or younger buyers looking to renew term life policies. Term life insurance policies with Mutual of Omaha are renewable for qualifying applicants up to age 94. Of note, not all applicants will qualify to renew policies beyond any age, as approval is based on health history and other factors. Many life insurance policies also require a medical exam. However, Mutual of Omaha stands alone as it does not cut off term life buyers over 65.

One important thing to highlight is Mutual of Omaha's availability to resolve consumer issues, even when it's not the company's fault. For example, Roger of Eagle, AK, originally left a complaint on ConsumerAffairs , and the company promptly responded. He later updated his review, saying, "Thank You Mutual of Omaha! Physicians Mutual Dental has informed me of my mistake. You are a fine company serving the life insurance needs of USA citizens and expats as well."

Mutual of Omaha Life Insurance Review

Best for retirement planning: New York Life

Offers aggressive financial products and extensively trained agents.

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Strong life insurance options for financial planning and wealth building
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Policies available nationwide
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Knowledgeable life insurance agents
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. May require a medical exam
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Buyers looking for more modest policies may not find the most competitive pricing

If you're preparing for a comfortable retirement or looking to build generational wealth, New York Life is one of the strongest options. If you have questions or genuinely want to understand your life insurance options, New York Life agents are among the most qualified professionals in the business.

• Life insurance provider with policies available across the US

New York Life Insurance  caters to a forward-thinking customer. It offers many robust investment options. So its agents are extensively trained to answer all questions about its policies. Questions could be as simple as what penalties you'll pay to take early withdrawals or loans from your life insurance policy.

Like other retirement planning vehicles, the earlier you start, the better. Premiums will be lower, and you can apply for a large payout. But if you can afford higher premiums at a later age, New York Life still offers comprehensive policies with loans and early withdrawal options to take you into retirement. Riders can also customize its coverage. For example, whole life customers can buy a living benefits rider to withdraw money in the event of a terminal illness. Buyers can also add an accidental death rider until age 70 for an extra death benefit for loved ones. This satisfies borrowers who want stability but like the idea of a higher payout should they die in their prime working years.

New York Life's knowledgeable agents are highlighted by William of Starks, Louisiana, on ConsumerAffairs , saying, "They are willing to help and pay without hassle. They make sure all your needs are met. They check with you often to make sure your policy is up to date. If at anytime there are questions that need addressing they are readily available to help."

Read our New York Life Insurance review here.

Best for end-of-life care: John Hancock

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Accelerated death benefits available for policyholders with terminal illnesses
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Term and permanent life insurance options available for seniors
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Life insurance options for applicants with diabetes
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Pricing may be higher than competitors for buyers under 50
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Some policies not available in all 50 states

John Hancock Life Insurance is among many life insurance companies offering an accelerated death benefit, or "living benefits." Even if you don't want to use your life insurance for retirement planning, you have early withdrawal options to keep you comfortable in the event of a terminal illness. Buyers can exercise the rider at any age as long as waiting periods and other terms are met.

If you develop a qualifying condition, John Hancock will pay 50-100% of your qualifying death benefit while you're still alive. However, it caps accelerated death benefit claims at $1 million if you expect to live a year or less. This could help balance costly medical bills and end-of-life costs beyond what social security or disability payments would comfortably cover.

Read our John Hancock Life Insurance review here.

Best for flexibility: USAA

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Affordable pricing starting with $12/month on some policies
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. May offer coverage to military members other companies won't cover
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Offers term and permanent life insurance options
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. 2 year waiting period for full benefits on some policies
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. May focus on death benefits only more than other companies
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. All permanent policies are underwritten and serviced by other companies, not by USAA
• USAA offers life insurance for the military, veterans, and the public.

USAA Life Insurance  policies are available to Americans from all walks of life, including military and non-military buyers. However, it offers unique whole life coverage to active duty military members beyond the government's equivalent of employer life insurance. USAA policies stick with the buyer wherever they work. With options for active duty military members, USAA is common among veterans with combat-related illnesses and disabilities sustained during deployment. Of course, buyers purchase these policies before the conditions become apparent.

USAA is among the limited life insurance providers still offering coverage with a history of cancer. Of course, not all buyers will qualify, and policy options are limited. Accounting for state laws, USAA life insurance policies may also pay out after a drug overdose (frequency may increase with more daily medications to treat age-related conditions) when other life insurance companies refuse. For seniors looking for a bit of flexibility, USAA could be an ideal option.

Read our USAA Life Insurance review here.

Best for universal life: Prudential

Offers aggressive financial plans.

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Available in all 50 states (New York residents may have different plans)
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Buyers can withdraw money to pay for nursing home bills due to severe illness or disability
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Knowledgeable agents who can walk you through your options
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Financial returns are limited
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Limited policy options for seniors and other groups who might struggle to find life insurance

The aggressive financial plans offered by Prudential may appeal to many younger buyers and those with a stable income. However, those with lower income or buyers who aren't sure about the financial system may be more hesitant to engage with Prudential. Like many other industry giants, Prudential is working to change this perception.

Prudential Life Insurance  offers survivorship options for life insurance shoppers. Unlike a standard life insurance policy, it covers two people. When one person passes, the policy continues growing as long as the surviving spouse continues making payments. The policy can increase to $65 million with a maximum age of 85. The two insureds cannot have an age gap of more than 25 years.

The PruLife SUL Protector program encompasses multiple categories such as the Preferred Best, Preferred Smoker, and Preferred Non-Tobacco. Universal life insurance policies with Prudential allow loans. So both parties can pull money out of the policy via loans at the cost of the final death benefit.

Read our Prudential Life Insurance review here.

Best for guaranteed issue: AIG

Get $250,000 of Term Life Insurance Coverage for as low as $13 per month.

• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Guaranteed life insurance available for seniors between 50 and 80
• Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. High financial strength and customer service ratings
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Some policies only have benefits up to $25,000
• con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. AIG may not offer more extensive death benefits for seniors

AIG Life Insurance cannot deny your application if you fall within the set age limits. That's thanks to guaranteed issue : two words many seniors and even younger applicants aren't used to hearing about life insurance. Seniors aged 50 to 80 enjoy guaranteed coverage with no medical exam, and the application is 100% online.

AIG policies are small, maxing out at $25,000. So this would be appropriate for funeral expenses and/or a small death benefit for surviving family members.

Read our AIG Life Insurance Review here.

Senior Life Insurance Options Ranked by Customer Satisfaction

J.D. Power conducts an annual study of life insurance based on reported customer satisfaction. Then it assigns companies a score out of 1,000, listing the top performers on its website. So if you're shopping for life insurance, the following companies are the ones J.D. Power readers had positive experiences with.

Our life insurance rating methodology looks at a few key factors. To ensure a fair and even playing field for insurance companies and customers, we look at customer satisfaction, financial stability, types of policies offered, average premiums, coverage exclusions, and more. We also factor in recent controversies and ways an insurance company may engage with and improve its community.

Factors such as customer satisfaction and average premiums are equally weighted. However, we are aware not all charitable efforts are recognized, and not all controversies are based on facts, so a company's engagement with its community and recent controversies are considered separately.

See our full methodology for how we rate insurance »

Life insurance could be worth it over 65, especially if you have a spouse and no other plans to cover end-of-life expenses.

The best type of life insurance for seniors will generally be a whole life insurance policy that doesn't expire. Whole life insurance also accrues a cash value over time which you can borrow against or use to pay premiums.

According to AARP, it takes 1-2 months on average for the company to pay out a life insurance policy.

If you are 75 or older and don't have a life insurance policy, it is still worth buying life insurance to cover end-of-life costs, but keep in mind that your options may be more limited (and more expensive) if you wait this long to find a policy. 

Editorial Note: Any opinions, analyses, reviews, or recommendations expressed in this article are the author’s alone, and have not been reviewed, approved, or otherwise endorsed by any card issuer. Read our editorial standards .

Please note: While the offers mentioned above are accurate at the time of publication, they're subject to change at any time and may have changed, or may no longer be available.

**Enrollment required.

• Main content

Morning Rundown: Tucker Carlson and Trump blamed for Ukraine aid delay, National Enquirer admits making up Ted Cruz father story, loose horses run amok in London

Car insurance rates are nuts right now. Here's how to lower your bill when cash is tight.

Car insurance costs are pretty brutal at the moment — they’re up more than 22% since this time last year. There’s plenty you can do to lower your bill, but some of the best advice out there still requires a certain amount of upfront cash.

For example, paying your annual premium all in one go could eliminate the extra fees some insurers charge customers for paying month by month. But that may not be an option if your budget is tight and your premium has surged.

Insurers have been playing catch-up since the pandemic, said Stephen Crewdson, senior director of insurance intelligence at J.D. Power. They were late to raise rates when auto prices were ticking up, and now their hikes are setting in even as vehicle prices cool. Nearly 14% of consumers reported shopping for new insurance last month, a recent J.D. Power survey found — the highest monthly rate since it started tracking the figure in 2020.

“We should hopefully see these premium increases taper off as time goes by,” Crewdson said.

In the meantime, there are still some ways to lower your bill this year. Here’s where to start.

Shop widely for discounts

Auto insurance customers this year are “gonna have to be more aggressive” to find savings, said Lee Baker, an Atlanta-based financial planner and founder of Apex Financial. “You might need to cast a wider net.”

That means checking all the discounts on offer, starting with your current carrier. From military discounts to bundling opportunities, policyholders often leave money on the table simply by not picking up the phone. When J.D. Power surveys consumers, it finds many aren’t fully aware what savings are out there, Crewdson said.

Your benefits package, at least for large employers — there’s a lot of little nuggets in there that people gloss over.

Preston Cherry, founder of Concurrent Financial Planning

“Ask somebody at your insurer. If you have an agent, ask your agent,” he said. “If you don’t have an agent, call in to the insurer, visit the website, look at the app and look at what discounts they offer.”

Experts also suggest considering the organizations in your orbit. Many professional and trade associations, alumni groups and even fraternity and sorority associations often negotiate discounts with insurers.

But your employer may be the best place to start hunting for perks. 

“Your benefits package, at least for large employers — there’s a lot of little nuggets in there that people gloss over,” said Preston Cherry, founder of Concurrent Financial Planning in Green Bay, Wisconsin.

While employers typically work with only a single insurer and any discounts probably won’t be drastic, experts said, they can help you start chipping away at your monthly costs.

Take that defensive driving course

Financial experts say this is one of the easiest strategies. Many insurance companies offer considerable savings when policyholders complete defensive driving courses — most of which are online — from organizations such as the National Safety Council or Defensive Driving by IMPROV .

“I always recommend taking defensive driving every year,” said Cherry. “The discount is worth it.”

Carriers in at least 34 states and Washington, D.C., typically offer discounts of up to 10% for course completion, according to I Drive Safely , a defensive driving course proctor.

Many carriers also offer their own programs for good driving behavior — though some require agreeing to a measure of surveillance. Progressive’s Snapshot, for example, offers policyholders a mobile app or a plug-in device for their vehicles that track, among other things, your braking patterns and the times of day you get behind the wheel, then use that information to determine your discount eligibility.

One caveat: Risky behavior can trigger a higher rate when it’s time to renew your policy, said Jude Boudreaux, a certified financial planner and partner at the Planning Center in New Orleans. But “if you’re trying to drive pretty conservatively and around town, using those can be a way to save some additional costs,” he said.

For those who work remotely or don’t drive much, Boudreaux also suggests pay-per-mile plans. These also rely on mileage- and behavior-tracking devices that may entail privacy trade-offs but could be a boon for some. Nationwide’s SmartMiles program, for example, offers a low base rate plus a variable one that depends on mileage. And for periodic longer road trips, it counts only the first 250 miles per day.

Check for family-friendly fine print

For consumers with kids who drive or are about to start, there’s a lot to consider that can affect your bill.

While it’s generally cheaper to add a teen driver to an existing policy or bundle than it is to buy a new one, repeated infractions (tickets, fender benders) can drive up your household’s costs, so weigh the trade-offs carefully.

“Sometimes bringing them inside the bundled package works, sometimes not,” said Cherry. “That’s always a tricky one.”

He advises starting any young drivers in your family on an inexpensive or mostly paid-off car. Since it has become more expensive to repair vehicles lately, consider how much cash you’re willing to risk on your kid’s behalf.

“It’s really trying to save costs by placing them in a vehicle that’s not much to insure and counterbalances their inexperience risk level to insure,” Cherry said.

Baker said academic achievements can also help trim your insurance costs. Many carriers offer “good student” discounts, typically for high-school or college students under age 25. Maintaining a B average or performing well on the SAT or ACT could net substantial savings. State Farm, for example, offers up to 30% off for high marks.

“There’s no guarantee that a student with good grades won’t get behind the wheel and do something crazy,” Baker conceded, but insurers are betting — for better or worse — that “if they’re doing right in school, they’re probably less risky.”

Trim the fat from your policy

Sometimes savings are staring up at you from your current insurance plan, experts said. 

Check your policy for redundancies and areas of overlap, said Cherry. For example, if you pay for AAA roadside assistance, you may be able to shave similar coverage off your auto insurance policy. Some newer cars already include some form of roadside assistance, he added.

A common tactic for lowering monthly premiums is to choose a policy with a higher deductible. Marcus Miller, a Jacksonville, Fla.-based financial planner at Mainstay Capital, urged caution here. Some clients, he said, “go in and just start slashing” line items from their policies and end up underinsured.

Instead, it’s smart to first build up an emergency fund for a potentially high deductible — and then make the switch, he advised.

Customers “could reasonably increase their deductible, as long as they have that cash set aside,” Miller said. “That will reduce their premium.”

J.J. McCorvey is a business and economy reporter for NBC News.

Florida homeowners insurance is skyrocketing: Here’s what to know

Across Florida, homeowners are dealing with costly insurance policies at a time when many have lost trust in their carriers after many dropped the ball on claims dealing with Hurricane Ian damage.

Now, customers are searching for ways to deal with the costs. Some are cutting back on parts of their policies, while others are dropping insurance entirely, or "going bare." In a drastic move, others are even leaving the state for cheaper, less disaster-prone areas.

Fort Myers resident Priscilla O’Harra, whose home barely was impacted by Hurricane Ian, was dropped by her insurance carrier a year later. She decided not to search for a new policy. Why throw away thousands on a carrier that won't help her?

“I’m just disgusted,” O’Harra said.

Here’s how much insurance is going up

Florida property owners already pay more than four times the national average for home insurance , up from triple the national average just last year . The cost of homeowners insurance on average increased more than 40% in the last year.

Three out of four Florida homeowners have seen their homeowner's insurance increase in the last year, while one in eight saw their policy carrier drop them, a recent survey out of real estate brokerage firm RedFin shows.

High prices are driving people out of Florida

One-third of those who lost coverage moved or plan to move as a result of that, they told RedFin.

Many seniors are leaving for “mid-South states,” such as the Carolinas –– places that have no or low income tax, less significant threat from extreme weather, and a lower cost of housing and insurance, AARP Florida Director Jeff Johnson said.

“We’re anticipating trends (in future census releases) that show as many older Floridians leaving as coming in the years to come,” Johnson said. “People move down here because of their heart and they leave because of their wallet.”

Some customers are dropping wind to save thousands, but jeopardizing homes

A number of homeowners across Florida told The USA TODAY Network-Florida that they had dropped – or were considering dropping – wind coverage from their insurance policies in order to save money. While it would decrease their annual policy costs, they acknowledged that it could leave them out of luck should a hurricane hit their home.

But, some of them say they think it’s worth trying.

Maurice Gutierrez is one such homeowner. His home in Naples was hit hard in Hurricane Ian and flooded, but he never filed a claim, covering the repair bill himself.

Still, he saw his homeowner’s insurance double the following year, and nearly double again after that.

 It just cost too much, he said, so he removed wind from his policy.

“If I save eight grand (a year) for five years?” Gutierrez said. “I can put a roof on twice. And have money left over for new windows.”

High insurance costs are being passed on to renters, too

In Lee County – hardest hit by Hurricane Ian - housing costs surged after the storm destroyed or seriously damaged more than 20,000 structures , displacing thousands into rental units as they waited for their homes to be repaired. And there they have remained.

Rentals still run hundreds of dollars higher a month than the national average . Here, households with an income of less than $87,000 are considered rent-burdened.

While the cost of rentals has dipped across the country, in Lee and other storm-vulnerable parts of Florida, rents have remained high because of costly property insurance, Johnson said. Apartment owners have had to pass these costs on to their renters in the form of higher rent, pushing tenants out or pushing seniors back into the workforce, he added.

What are legislators doing?

The GOP-led legislature has tightened the noose around customers in the last five years, repeatedly making it harder and harder for customers to sue their insurance carriers. They say that frivolous lawsuits against carriers have artificially inflated Florida’s insurance policy costs.

But the data only somewhat bears that out. 

An Office of Insurance Regulation January analysis of insurance claims found most claimant lawsuits came only after carriers delayed payment to policyholders, sometimes by more than a year.

This suggests carriers’ own delays may have triggered the lawsuits. 

Some, though, say Florida isn’t regulating its insurance market appropriately.

Doug Quinn, executive director of industry watchdog group American Policyholder Association, told The News-Press / Naples Daily News the real reason behind the high premiums is mismanagement: insurance companies don’t hold enough cash in reserve to pay out claims. 

Then, when hurricane season devastates their policyholders, they fold, he said.

Want to file a complaint against your insurance company? Here’s how:

Has your insurer delayed claim payment, provided a lowball claim or an unusually high quote for insurance that is very out of step with the market? If so, and you decide to file a complaint against your company, gather the following:

• The full name of the insurance company involved
• Your policy number
• Claim number (if any)
• Authorization to act on behalf of the insured, if needed
• A detailed explanation of your concerns

You can file your complaint two ways: by calling the Insurance Consumer Helpline at 1-877-MY-FL-CFO (693-5236) or going online at MyFloridaCFO.com.

After submitting your complaint, an email will be sent to you with your complaint number, and instructions for attaching supporting documentation.

According to the website, it may take up to 30 days for the office to process your complaint.

Kate Cimini is the Florida Investigative Reporter for the USA TODAY-Network Florida, based at The News-Press and The Naples Daily News. Contact her at 239-207-9369 or [email protected].