Court Protects an Estate Sued By An Annuity Company For Over-payment: Companies Should Know When Their Customers Die

ID 179769815 © Artur Szczybylo | Dreamstime.com

An annuity company sued a customer’s estate for not reporting the death of his wife, which resulted in him receiving larger monthly payments after her death than he was entitled to under the contract.  The customer died in 2013, and the annuity company discovered the over-payments in 2014. In 2016, the annuity company filed suit against the customer’s estate for the over-payments. Both parties filed summary judgment motions, and the trial court entered judgment for the annuity company. The estate appealed.  

The court of appeals reversed and rendered judgment for the estate. The court first addressed the annuity company’s breach of contract claim. The court held that the contract did not expressly or impliedly require the surviving spouse to report the death of the first spouse. The court held:

"In sum, the annuity contract, taken as a whole, does not evidence an intent to impose an implied obligation on Harold to notify Principal of Emily’s death or an implied obligation to return money Harold received in excess of the stated contract amount. Moreover, it is undisputed that this was Principal’s contract. “In Texas, a writing is generally construed most strictly against its author and in such a manner as to reach a reasonable result consistent with the apparent intent of the parties.” Principal, a sophisticated commercial enterprise, did not include express provisions requiring Harold to notify Principal of Emily’s death or to return money received in excess of the stated contract amount. The annuity contract, as written, does not evidence an intent to imply these obligations. Because we conclude the annuity contract, taken as a whole, does not support imposition of an implied obligation on Harold to notify Principal of Emily’s death or an implied obligation to return money Harold received in excess of the stated contract amount, Principal cannot show Harold breached the annuity contract."

The court then reviewed the annuity company’s "money-had-and-received" claim. The court described the claim: 

“Money had and received is an equitable doctrine designed to prevent unjust enrichment. To prevail on a claim for money had and received, the plaintiff need only prove that the defendant holds money which in equity and good conscience belongs to the plaintiff.” 

The court held that the claim was barred by the two-year statute of limitations  because the annuity company did not file its claim within two years of discovering the over-payments.

Finally, the court rejected the annuity company’s fraud by nondisclosure claim. According to the courty, in order to establish fraud by non-disclosure:

“Principal must prove: (1) Harold deliberately failed to disclose material facts; (2) Harold had a duty to disclose such facts to Principal; (3) Principal was ignorant of the facts and did not have an equal opportunity to discover them; (4) by failing to disclose the facts, Harold intended to induce Principal to act or refrain from acting; and (5) Principal relied on the non-disclosure, which resulted in injury.” 

The court held that the annuity company had an equal opportunity to discover its customer’s death:

Principal had an equal opportunity to discover Emily’s death. Principal had internal procedures in place to discover this very type of information. Angela Essick, Principal’s corporate representative, testified that between 2001 and the present, Principal utilized a third-party company and the Social Security Master Index to provide it with a list of names and social security numbers of the deceased on a quarterly basis. Principal would compare these names and social security numbers with those of its annuitants. Principal failed to discover Emily’s death through these channels because it never obtained Emily’s social security number. Principal cannot rely on its internal oversight to claim it did not have an equal opportunity to discover Emily’s death.

Accordingly, the court dismissed all of the annuity company’s claims and rendered judgment for the estate of the customer.

The case has serious implications  for annuity companies specifically, to be sure, but generally for any company involved in the financial services industry.  The case also has serious implications for agents, as they might be expected by their contacting principals to protect them from loss by reporting timely the death of customers.  Agents should be cognizant of changes to agreements and contracts, and should consider these carefully in establishing business practices.

For the consumer, the decision is welcome, but should not be relied upon in expecting protection from continuing to collect and use funds they are not legally entitled to keep; the company in this case may have recovered from the estate had it acted more quickly in filing its claim.

The decision in the case is at first glance surprising, but as is often the case with surprising results, heavily dependent on a set of facts that are unlikely to occur.  Administrators, Executors, and Trustees should follow counsel's guidance regarding treatment of estate funds, and notification of third parties.   

The case is In re Estate of Scott, No. 04-19-00592-CV, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 4059 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 27, 2020, no pet. history).

Ohio Makes Trust Contests More Difficult

ID 108096044 © Designer491 | Dreamstime.com

A new law, commonly referred to as HB 595, has made significant changes to Ohio probate law that could affect your will or trust. The law is far-reaching, and contains much more information than can be addressed in a single blog post, but there are many developments that could  impact you, your loved ones, or your or their estate plans. 

One of the important developments is that HB 595 changes the law dealing with some legal challenges to a revocable trust made irrevocable by the death of the creator (grantor/settlor) of the trust. The actions involved include:

• Contesting the validity of the trust;
• Contesting the validity of an amendment to the trust made during the settlor's lifetime;
• Contesting a revocation of the trust during the settlor's lifetime; or
• Contesting the validity of a transfer made to the trust during the settlor's lifetime.

Under the new law, a person seeking to file a legal action contesting the trust in any of the foregoing ways MUST do so within the EARLIER of:

• The date that is two years after the settlor's death, OR
• The date that is six months from the date on which the trustee sent the person filing the action a copy of the trust instrument and notice of the trust's existence, along with the trustee's name and address and time allowed for beginning an action.

HB 595 also establishes that no person may contest the validity of a trust as to facts already decided.  If the settlor submitted the trust to probate court during his or her lifetime, and the court declared the trust valid under Ohio law, the trust is effectively incontestible, at least as to the parties that were notified.  Under the new law,  a person may still contest the validity of the trust as to those particular facts, if the person should have been named as a defendant to the action to declare validity and was not, or was not properly served.

What does this mean for you? If you are the settlor of a trust, it means you have more tools available to ensure that a trust you create will not be challenged. If you are an heir or a beneficiary  a trust, it means you may have a much harder time challenging the validity of a trust, or of an amendment to, revocation of, or transfer to that trust.  If you are a successor trustee of a trust made irrevocable by the death of the creator, you should provide an initial notification to beneficiaries that will start the six month limitation as soon as possible.   

Protecting Your Deceased Loved Ones From Identity Theft

We've all been warned about protecting ourselves from identity theft, but one group of victims can't take action to protect themselves—the dead. Identity thieves steal the identities of more than 2 million deceased Americans a year, according to fraud prevention firm ID Analytics. Fortunately, there are steps that you can take to discourage identity thieves from targeting a deceased loved one.

 

Part of the reason the deceased make prime targets for scam artists is that it can take up to six months for credit agencies to be notified about a death. As soon as possible, you should send copies of your loved one's death certificate through certified mail to the three major credit reporting agencies—Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. Along with a certified copy of the death certificate, you should include papers certifying that you are the executor or person representing the deceased; the decedent's full name, date of birth, and Social Security number; the decedent's most recent address; and the date of death. You should also request that the credit bureaus put a "deceased -- do not issue credit" alert on the decedent's credit files.

In addition, you should send copies of the death certificate to any banks, insurers, credit card companies, or other financial institutions where the deceased had accounts. You should also cancel the decedent's driver's license by notifying the state motor vehicles department.

One way that identity thieves find victims is by looking through obituaries. When writing your loved one's obituary, try to avoid information that might be useful to identity thieves such as date of birth, mother's maiden name, or the decedent's address. Think about what information someone would need to open a bank account and avoid including that in the obituary.

Once the proper agencies and institutions have been notified, you should continue to monitor the decedent's credit report for a year to make sure there are no problems.  A free copy of the three credit agencies’ reports is available annually to executors or trustees.  Go to: www.annualcreditreport.com.

For more information from Bankrate about protecting a deceased relative from identity theft, click here.

Questions to Ask Before Serving as Trustee

Being asked to serve as the trustee of the trust of a family member is a great honor. It means that the family member trusts your judgment and is willing to put the welfare of the beneficiary or beneficiaries in your hands. 

But being a trustee is also a great responsibility. You need to accept your responsibility fully informed and with your eyes wide open. Here are six questions to ask before saying "yes":

• May I read the trust? The trust document is your instruction manual. It tells you what you should do with the funds or other property you will be entrusted to manage. Make sure you read it and understand it. Ask the drafting attorney any questions you may have.

• What are the goals of the grantor (the person creating the trust)? Unfortunately, many trusts say little or nothing about their purpose. They give the trustee considerable discretion about how to spend trust funds with little or no guidance. Often the trusts say that the trustee may distribute principal for the benefit of the surviving spouse or children for their "health, education, maintenance and support." Is this a limitation, meaning you can't pay for a yacht (despite arguments from the son that he needs it for his mental health)? Or is it a mandate that you pay to support the surviving spouse even if he could work and it means depleting the funds before they pass to the next generation? How are you to balance the needs of current and future beneficiaries? It is important that you ask the grantor while you can. It may even be useful if the trust’s creator can put her intentions in writing in the form of a letter or memorandum addressed to you.

• How much help will I receive? As trustee, will you be on your own or working with a co-trustee? If working with one or more co-trustees, how will you divide up the duties? If the co-trustee is a professional or an institution, such as a bank or trust company, will it take responsibility for investments, accounting and tax issues, and simply consult with you on questions about distributions? If you do not have a professional co-trustee, can you hire attorneys, accountants and investment advisors as needed to make sure you operate the trust properly?

• How long will my responsibilities last? Are you being asked to take this duty on until the youngest minor child reaches age 25, in other words for a clearly limited amount of time, or for an indefinite period that could last the rest of your life? In either case, under what terms can you resign? Do you name your successor, does the trust  or does someone else?

• What is my liability? Generally trustees are relieved of liability in the trust document unless they are grossly negligent or intentionally violate their responsibilities. In addition, professional trustees are generally held to a higher standard than family members or friends. What this means is that you won't be held liable if for instance you get professional help with the trust investments and the investments happen to drop in value. However, if you use your neighbor who is a financial planner as your adviser without checking to see if he has run afoul of the applicable licensing agencies, and he pockets the trust funds, you may be held liable. A well-respected Massachusetts attorney who served as trustee on many trusts used a friend as an investment adviser who put the trust funds in risky investments just before the 2008-2009 stock market crash. The attorney was held personally liable and suspended from the practice of law. So, be careful and read what the trust says in terms of relieving you of personal liability.

• Will I be compensated? Often family members and friends choose to serve as trustees without compensation. If the duties are especially demanding, however, it is appropriate for trustees to be paid for service. The question, then, is how much. Professionals generally charge an annual fee of 1 to 2 percent of assets in the trust. So, the annual fee for a trust holding $1 million would be $10,000. Institutions and professionals generally charge a higher percentage for  smaller trusts and a lower percentage for larger trusts. If you are performing all of the work for a trust, including investments, distributions and accounting, it would be inappropriate to charge a similar fee. If, however, you are paying others to perform these functions or are acting as co-trustee with a professional trustee, charging this much may be seen as inappropriate. A typical fee in such a case is a quarter of what the professional trustee charges, or .25 percent (often referred to by financial professionals as 25 basis points). In any case, it's important for you to read what the trust says about trustee compensation and discuss the issue with the grantor.

If after getting answers to all these questions you feel comfortable serving as trustee, you should accept the role. It is an honor to be asked and you will provide a great service to the grantor and beneficiaries.

For a list of things to do after being appointed a trustee, click here.

For more on the different kinds of trusts, click here.

ODI Assists Families Locate Lost Life Insurance Policies

If you suspect a deceased loved one has a life insurance policy that you cannot locate, there is a service through the Ohio Department of Insurance (ODI) that can assist in identifying and locating the policy. ODI’s missing life policy search service is a comprehensive search service that assists Ohio residents, and the families of deceased Ohio residents, in locating lost insurance policies purchased in the state. The search identifies the existence of any life insurance policies or annuity contracts purchased in Ohio and issued on the life of, or owned by, a deceased person.

Since its implementation in September of 2009, the missing life policy search service has had 682 valid search requests, and have matched 442 polices with their rightful owners. Executors, legal representatives, or members of the deceased person’s immediate family may file a search request with the Department. To submit a request, visit the Missing Life Policy Search Service, page of ODI's website.  Go here to print out a request form.  Have the form notarized, attach a copy of the certified death certificate, and mail it to the Department.

The Department forwards the search requests and supporting documentation to all Ohio-licensed life insurance companies within 25 business days of submission. If an insurance company has information about an in-force individual insurance policy on the life of the deceased person or an individual annuity contract where the deceased person is an annuitant, the insurer is required to take action to administer the policy and/or contract according to its terms. If any money is to be paid to a beneficiary, the insurance company will contact the beneficiary directly. In this case, the company has 21 days to notify the consumer after contacting the Department.

Ohioans with questions about life insurance can call the Department's toll-free consumer hotline at 1-800-686-1526. A life insurance informational toolkit is also available on the Department's website. The toolkit provides tip sheets, publications, and links to other helpful web sites.

Retain an Attorney or Accountant to Seek and Obtain a Taxpayer Identification Number for a Trust

Seemingly simple decisions can cause unexpected difficulty administering an estate. Among these is the decision whether to utilize an attorney or accountant to  file for and obtain a taxpayer identification number (TIN) for a trust.  

Most revocable trusts change their tax and legal status upon the death of the last surviving grantor. Sometimes called a settlor, the grantor is the person that generally creates and contributes property to a trust that benefits the grantor during his or her life.  During the life of the grantor, particularly if the trust is revocable, the trust is considered a “grantor” trust under the Internal Revenue Code.  The significance of being classified as a grantor trust is that the trust does not have a separate tax existence; the grantor is not required to obtain a separate Taxpayer or Employer Identification Number (TIN or EIN), and the trust is not required to file a separate tax return.  The grantor affixes his or her social security number to assets requiring a TIN for the trust, and files only a personal income tax return.

Upon the death of the grantor, however, the IRS requires that the trust, which is now irrevocable, utilize a different TIN.  Simply, a trust cannot use the social security of a dead person.  If the trust has taxable income, the trust may also be required file a separate income tax return.  Thus, a successor trustee will typically file for and obtain a new TIN for the trust shortly after the death of the grantor. This application process is relatively simple, and common for attorneys and accountants familiar with trusts, the grantor trust rules in the Internal Revenue Code, and the distinctions between the the original revocable trust and the resulting irrevocable trust.  

Because the proper name and characterization of the trust on titles and accounts is important, attorneys will usually prepare for the successor trustee a Certificate or Memorandum of Trust, which permits financial institutions to properly title assets, and follow the instructions of the successor trustee.  These documents often identify the correct TIN. Filing for and obtaining the TIN, and preparing the Certificate or Memorandum of Trust is usually completed the same day, or within a few days of completion of the necessary forms, for a nominal fee: easy breezy nice and easy.

Increasingly, however, successor trustees are either filing for the TIN themselves, or relying upon professionals with neither accounting nor legal expertise to request and obtain the TIN.  The results can range from frustrating to devastating to the estate plan.

Consider the following examples of mistakes attorneys increasingly observe:

• The successor trustee goes to the bank in order to access the bank account.  The helpful teller advises the trustee of the need to obtain the TIN, and “assists” the successor trustee in applying online for the TIN.  The account is closed, and a new account is opened with the new TIN, and the trustee is given a piece of paper showing the TIN, and sent on his or her way.  The successor trustee goes to the next bank, broker, or financial advisor holding or managing trust accounts.  Confident that everything will go smoothly, the trustee presents the death certificate and the TIN to the institution with a polite request to liquidate the account.  The institution refuses, advising that they do not have everything needed.   The institution is unclear what the title of the trust is or should be, and what authority the successor trustee has regarding the account.  After several attempts the successor trustee is forced to contract an attorney to prepare documents that could have been prepared initially, which would have prevented the delay and frustration.

• The attorney in the foregoing example reviews the paperwork provided by the teller and realizes that the application is completed incorrectly, and that as a result the IRS will likely request the filing of Form 1041 trust income tax returns from the date of the creation of the trust through the present tax year.  In a “pay me now or pay me later,” series of alternatives, the attorney offers to correct the improperly completed application.

• The attorney in the foregoing example reviews the paperwork, but cannot determine whether the application for the TIN was properly prepared.  The teller prepared the application online, but did not print out a hard copy of the application. Concerned that improper preparation of the application will result in expense or loss to the trust, for which the trustee or heirs may seek to hold the attorney responsible, the attorney either (1) refuses to utilize the TIN and recommends abandonment of the TIN, charging the client for preparation of a new application, and paperwork abandoning the prior TIN, or (2) the attorney requires the trustee to sign an acknowledgment that use of the TIN may cause loss or expense, which releases and indemnifies  the attorney from loss resulting from continued use of of the TIN.

• The teller in the previous example identifies the grantor of the trust, now deceased, as the responsible party, since the grantor created the trust.  IRS correspondence is directed to the deceased grantor at the grantor’s last residence.  Because the property is promptly sold, the successor trustee is not advised that a Form 1041 income tax return must be filed. When the successor trustee learns that a return should have been filed, the trustee is forced to pay the tax liability, and resulting penalty and interest, from his personal assets since the trust assets were distributed. 

• An agent assisting a successor trustee in filling out a beneficiary claim form, assists the trustee in obtaining online a TIN, and opening a a money market account to hold the funds.  The successor trustee is the only beneficiary of the trust, and the recipient of various means-tested government benefits.  Although the trust was drafted to protect the assets for the benefit of the beneficiary, under state law, the protection is only effective if the beneficiary is not also the trustee.  Absent the important legal advice and direction to resign as trustee prior to filing the claim form he negotiates the account.  The trustee later learns that the claim of funds constituted income in the month that the claim was paid, thereby disqualifying the beneficiary from a host of government benefits, including free health care.  

• A successor trustee completes the application to obtain a TIN for the trust online, and proceeds to administer the trust estate.  The IRS sends letters demanding Form 1041 income tax returns for fourteen tax years.  The letters, unfortunately, are sent to the deceased grantor’s home, pursuant to the application, which home was promptly sold by the successor trustee.  The successor trustee is later contacted by a revenue agent.  With the assets of the trust long distributed, the trustee pays from her own funds an attorney and accountant to resolve the matter. 

• A family friend helps the successor trustee obtain a TIN, but writes down the TIN incorrectly.  Neither the friend nor the trustee realize the error.  The IRS contacts the taxpayer when a return is filed using the incorrect TIN.  An accountant is retained to investigate and resolve the problem.

Each of the foregoing represent actual cases. The application for a TIN may seem simple, but the terms used in the application, and the precise information requested can be confusing.  The fact that the application can be  prepared online may cause some to believe that the application is either very easy to complete, or that proper completion is unimportant.  Neither assumption is correct. 

Well-meaning professionals, such as tellers, bankers, insurance agents, brokers, and financial planners, and helpful friends may assume that they are are in safe waters completing the form for a customer or friend.  IRS rules require that third parties that complete the application identify themselves, and abide by record-keeping requirements, which rules the well-intentioned often fail to observe.  Failure to observe these rules may make impossible immediate solutions to online technical glitches or typograghical errors, thereby delaying adminstration of the estate.  Perhaps the ultimate tragic irony to the immediacy offered by the online application process is that failure to follow the third party disclosure, record preparation and record keeping rules may mean that a good TIN takes longer to obtain online than if it had been applied for by traditional mail.

Professionals should also be aware that there may be liability for applications prepared improperly, and that the professional insurance may or may not cover any loss.  Non-lawyers and non-accountants are properly cautioned that the completion of the forms, and the accompanying advice, may constitute the unauthorized practice of law, or exceed the scope of the professional's licensing.

Simply, retain an attorney or accountant to seek and obtain the TIN.

President Obama's 2014 Budget Includes Troubling Changes Affecting Estate Planning

The celebration following the federal government's increase in the estate tax exemption to $5.25 million is, perhaps, destined to be short lived.  President Obama’s proposed budget plan for 2014 came out on April 10, and proposes substantial changes to the estate and income tax code.  These changes would mean real changes in estate planning. 

According to the budget plan, the federal estate tax rate will increase from 40 to 45 percent. The individual exemption equivalent will be reduced from $5.25 million to $3.5 million, and it will not adjust upward over time to keep pace with inflation. This means that as time goes on and inflation increases, people will surpass the exemption mark due to appreciation in the value of their estate, and be subject to federal estate taxes. Further, these changes are proposed  as "permanent changes" meaning that they will not sunset or lapse in time.  

The lifetime gifting exemption equivalent is also affected, since the gift and estate taxes use a unified exemption.  The maximum amount that a person can leave his or her family in combined taxable lifetime gifts and inheritance is thus reduced from $5.25 million, which increases with inflation, to a non-adjusting maximum of $3.5 million.

Limiting Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts

More surprising and substantive changes are proposed for sophisticated estate plans. A GRAT (grantor retained annuity trust) is a tax-reducing trust popular for giving assets to family members while retaining an income benefit for some defined period of time.  The grantor puts his or her assets into the trust and receives  an annuity which pays a fixed amount each year. Gift tax is paid when the GRAT is created and the tax is based upon the present value of the remainder of the trust, meaning that the value of the gift, for gift tax purposes is substantially less than the actual fair market value of the assets.  One of the real challenges in such planning is that if the grantor dies before the trust ends, the assets become part of the grantor's taxable estate,and the purpose for the trust, reducing estate taxes, is frustrated.. If the grantor survives the term of the trust, any assets left to the beneficiary — usually the grantor’s children — are tax free. GRATs have typically been short-term trusts to make it more likely that the grantor survives beyond the term of the trust.

The proposed budget will require a minimum trust term of ten (10)  years for all GRATS. This defined longer term makes it more likely that the grantor may die during the trust’s existence, and increases the chances that the trust does nothing to reduce the value of the taxable estate. If death of the grantor occurs within the ten year term, the trust is taxed as part of estate, effectively losing nearly half its value to federal estate taxes.  The proposed budget, therefore, limits greatly the attractiveness of  GRATS as an estate planning option.

Eliminating Intentionally Defective Grantor Trusts

The proposed budget also effectively eliminates intentionally defective grantor trusts (IDGT).  An IDGT  is used to freeze the value of appreciating assets for tax purposes. This strategy allows the grantor to be the owner of the assets for income tax purposes but it removes the value of the assets from the grantor’s taxable estate. As the value of the trust increases, the transferor receives the income earned by the assets (and pays tax on the income) but the assets grow outside of the transferor’s estate.

Under proposed budget:, there would be no separation in the tax codes for this trust. Estate or gift tax would have to be paid on the trust at the time of the owner’s death. This would make the IDGT obsolete.

Signalling a Change?

Perhaps the most significant change reflected in the proposed budget is that the federal government has, once again, returned to a  lack of appreciation for the benefits of certainty and stability in estate and business planning.  Among the reasons that many celebrated the recent changes to the estate tax code (recent being changes adopted at the last minute, less than six months ago), is that the inflation adjustment and portability provisions signaled, to some,  an appreciation for long-term stability and certainty.  It appeared to some that having resolved the estate tax exemption amount, and having adjusted it automatically for inflation over time,  the federal government was, in effect, acknowledging the need for stability and certainty, eschewing uncertainty, and detrimental periodic and last minute legislative changes.  

Of course, perhaps the proposed budget is really the "same as it ever was."  

This article is based in large part on an article by Phoebe Venable, entitled "Obama's Budget Plan would Hit Estate Plans Hard," published May 11, 2013, in the Tennessean, and available online here.   

Estate Planning for Your Online Assets

There is no question that our real lives have more virtual reality than ever before, and executors and successor trustees are increasingly tasked with unraveling the legal disposition of online assets, accounts, and resources.   Dispensing with tedious recitation of examples from recent articles regarding the legal and practical impediments to identifying and recovering these assets, for example or retrieve email, facebook accounts, online assets such as blogs, and the like, which are appearing more frequently each day, I posit a simple question: Is there any doubt that identifying, cataloging  and planning for the disposition of your online accounts and virtual assets is preferable to simply leaving them to whichever family member steps forward to handle your estate to figure out?

To those who appreciate the importance of this type of planning, I commend the excellent infographic, Step By Step Expert Guide To Protect Yourself Online Before You Die. With advice from Evan Carroll, author of one of my favorite websites, The Digital Beyond,  and Nate Lustig,  of  SecureSafe, the infographic defines digital assets, presents the various digital estate planning services, and discusses how to leave a digital legacy. Check it out here.

Insurance Department Helps Locate Missing Life Insurance Policies

If you suspect a deceased loved one has a life insurance policy that you cannot locate, there is a service through the Ohio Department of Insurance that can assist in identifying and locating the policy.  The Ohio Department of Insurance’s missing life policy search service is a comprehensive search service that assists Ohio residents, and the families of deceased Ohio residents, in locating lost insurance policies purchased in the state. The search identifies the existence of any life insurance policies or annuity contracts purchased in Ohio and issued on the life of, or owned by, a deceased person.

Since its implementation in September of 2009, the missing life policy search service has had 682 valid search requests, and have matched 442 polices with their rightful owners.  “This is a great program that works for the consumers of Ohio to help them locate life insurance dollars to which they are entitled,” Ohio Lieutenant Governor and Department of Insurance Director Mary Taylor said in a release. “It’s great that Ohio’s life insurance companies are able to work together, along with the Ohio Department of Insurance, to perform this service. These numbers are amazing and we encourage Ohioans to continue to submit their search requests to the Department.”  

Executors, legal representatives, or members of the deceased person’s immediate family may file a search request with the Department.  To submit a request, visit www.insurance.ohio.gov   to print out the request form.  Have the form notarized, attach a copy of the certified death certificate, and mail it to the Department.

The Department forwards the search requests and supporting documentation to all Ohio-licensed life insurance companies within 25 business days of submission. If an insurance company has information about an in-force individual insurance policy on the life of the deceased person or an individual annuity contract where the deceased person is an annuitant, the insurer is required to take action to administer the policy and/or contract according to its terms.  If any money is to be paid to a beneficiary, the insurance company will contact the beneficiary directly. In this case, the company has 21 days to notify the consumer after contacting the Department.

Ohioans with questions about life insurance can call the Department's toll-free consumer hotline at 1-800-686-1526. A life insurance informational toolkit is also available on the Department's website at www.insurance.ohio.gov. The toolkit provides tip sheets, publications, and links to other helpful web sites.