We've all been talking about private equity investing in life settlements for a while. The rumors have persisted for the past year and the whispers have grown louder throughout 2010. Finally, a report of movement about private equity in the life settlement world has come out naming Cerebus Capital as the funding source for Proverian Capital. Cerebrus is one of the largest PE firms in the United States.
While I am sure Proverian wouldn't admit if Cerebrus is their funding source, this is a huge win for Proverian. You know anyone that can buy Chrysler and live to tell about it is well capitalized.
I for one applaud Cerebrus for jumping into the longevity market. I have a feeling this will pave the way for other PE firms to jump in as well.
www.cerberuscapital.com
Life Settlements
Showing posts with label life settlement provider. Show all posts
Showing posts with label life settlement provider. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Monday, December 13, 2010
Life Settlement Brokers And Best Practices?
The Institutional Life Markets Association, ILMA for short, came out with its list of best practices for life settlement providers. Keep in mind, the ILMA is slanted from an investor's persepective. This is a not-for-profit trade association focused on the longevity market as an investment class. In essence, this is the investor's wish list of what a life settlment transaction should have to make them, the investor, feel more comfortable.
It is hard to argue against most of their best practices. Some of the suggested items are:
1) Providers certifying the intermediary (i.e. a life settlement broker, insurance agent, financial advisor or attorney). Life settlement providers already do this to some extent, but the degree to which it is done varies dramatically.
2) Guidance to providers on transferred policies; whether policy premiums have been financed; anti-fraud plans including retention of a medical professional or underwriter capable of comparing policy applications to medical records for material discrepancies; and privacy policies; and direction on state and federal laws and regulations compliance.
3) Policy owners should only work through certified intermediaries unless the policy owner has a net worth of at least 1,000,000. Essentially, if you aren't an accredited investor type, don't think about calling Coventry yourself. This is moronic to me. Is the ILMA suggesting that those with a lower net worth aren't sufficiently sophisticated enough to handle a direct to consumer life settlement provider? Why not? Perhaps the policy owner wants to save the brokerage commission? If they are of a lower net worth, the brokerage commission is probably more important anyway. Perhaps the policy owner has excellent counsel and advice, but their advisor (whatever type they might be...estate, law, insurance, financial, etc.) isn't participating in the transaction, but merely advising on the impetus for selling the policy? We can not continue to attempt to save people from themselves or assume people are not capable of things they may very well be capable of. Trying to treat selling one's personal asset, their life insurance policy, as analogous to investing in hedge funds doesn't make sense.
While the best practices didn't explicitly call for the use of a life settlement broker, it seems implicitly communicated that the best intermediaries are life settlement brokers. No insurance producer, attorney or financial planner could realistically execute the intermediary best practices called out by the ILMA if they only attempt life settlements intermittently. Only dedicated life settlement brokers are capable of effectively establishing the market price of a policy since they are most likely to have the most well developed networks of funding sources and consistent implementation of best practices described by the ILMA. I for one agree with this assertion.
To implement the best practices across the industry in a uniform fashion will require time and financial resources. I don't know how interested providers, in a time when funding isn't pervasive, are in adopting the ILMA guidelines. Then again, if this is what investors want, perhaps the providers won't have a choice.
To read the ILMA's best practices in their entirety, please visit the ILMA's website at www.lifemarketsassociation.org
It is hard to argue against most of their best practices. Some of the suggested items are:
1) Providers certifying the intermediary (i.e. a life settlement broker, insurance agent, financial advisor or attorney). Life settlement providers already do this to some extent, but the degree to which it is done varies dramatically.
2) Guidance to providers on transferred policies; whether policy premiums have been financed; anti-fraud plans including retention of a medical professional or underwriter capable of comparing policy applications to medical records for material discrepancies; and privacy policies; and direction on state and federal laws and regulations compliance.
3) Policy owners should only work through certified intermediaries unless the policy owner has a net worth of at least 1,000,000. Essentially, if you aren't an accredited investor type, don't think about calling Coventry yourself. This is moronic to me. Is the ILMA suggesting that those with a lower net worth aren't sufficiently sophisticated enough to handle a direct to consumer life settlement provider? Why not? Perhaps the policy owner wants to save the brokerage commission? If they are of a lower net worth, the brokerage commission is probably more important anyway. Perhaps the policy owner has excellent counsel and advice, but their advisor (whatever type they might be...estate, law, insurance, financial, etc.) isn't participating in the transaction, but merely advising on the impetus for selling the policy? We can not continue to attempt to save people from themselves or assume people are not capable of things they may very well be capable of. Trying to treat selling one's personal asset, their life insurance policy, as analogous to investing in hedge funds doesn't make sense.
While the best practices didn't explicitly call for the use of a life settlement broker, it seems implicitly communicated that the best intermediaries are life settlement brokers. No insurance producer, attorney or financial planner could realistically execute the intermediary best practices called out by the ILMA if they only attempt life settlements intermittently. Only dedicated life settlement brokers are capable of effectively establishing the market price of a policy since they are most likely to have the most well developed networks of funding sources and consistent implementation of best practices described by the ILMA. I for one agree with this assertion.
To implement the best practices across the industry in a uniform fashion will require time and financial resources. I don't know how interested providers, in a time when funding isn't pervasive, are in adopting the ILMA guidelines. Then again, if this is what investors want, perhaps the providers won't have a choice.
To read the ILMA's best practices in their entirety, please visit the ILMA's website at www.lifemarketsassociation.org
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Life Settlement Industry Poised for Growth
We've been seeing evidence of a recovery in the life settlement market for the past couple of months. Providers are buying for new funding sources, brokers are closing more deals and an index that tracks the industry has been pointing to a more positive market. Scott Page, the president and CEO of the Lifeline Program, wrote a great article which provides some background information on the current life settlement market and reasons to be optimistic moving forward. As the head of an Atlanta, Ga based life settlement provider he is indeed on the front lines and has a great vantage point. The following is an excerpt from the National Underwriter, which was published on 7/26/10.
For the first time in 24 months, the forecast for the life settlement industry is bright, particularly after surviving a perfect storm situation in 2008. The life settlement market was whipsawed two years ago when a dramatic change in life expectancy tables combined with the collapse of the credit markets to nearly cripple the industry.
The fallout was significant: Credit disappeared, hedge funds fled, offers were pulled, some companies folded and consumers ultimately suffered. However, the life settlement business has once again proven to be resilient as funding sources have returned, and the industry has another opportunity to flourish—as long as it is done the right way this time. The companies in our industry need to focus primarily on the long haul, while the goals of the capital sources need to align with the goals of the providers and the rest of the industry.
At the moment, there are a number of large players poised to help bring the industry back to prior glory. But there are challenges ahead. The industry is facing what can be best described as a crisis of confidence, which can be seen at both ends of the business.
At one end, capital sources, including hedge funds and private equity groups, remain wary. Some got burned badly from polluted portfolios containing policies with insurable-interest question marks and origination concerns. Fortunately, regulators have finally cracked-down on stranger-owned policies.
At the other end, there are skeptical agents and brokers who were let down when policy offers were pulled—sometimes inexplicably, often unprofessionally and usually with little or no notice. In between, providers had little control of the situation and were forced to make excuses that left agents and brokers scrambling for answers. It was a difficult time, and the industry as a whole has the scars to prove it.
Looking back, perhaps the industry needed the shake-up, painful as it was. The life settlement industry is unique and challenging. Too many new companies jumped into the business with little experience but a lot of attitude. They quickly secured a bunch of state licenses and started vacuuming up policies without understanding the intricacies of the business. We saw ignorance of origination and insurable interest risks; poor medical underwriting; disregard for transparency and standardization; and a complete lack of understanding of how to track the insured and manage the asset class.
As previously mentioned, the future for the industry is, indeed, bright. Moving forward, the industry needs to address the confidence issues head-on and ensure that these situations never happen again. Foremost, the goals of the providers must be better aligned with the capital. Ideally, the provider companies should have their own capital or a least direct control of the capital. Transparency also emerges again as a key factor. Full disclosure of fees and commissions adds to the industry’s legitimacy, but we need to go even further and begin to present unimpeachable proof of funds when offers are made. This is of tremendous value to brokers, agents and consumers.
In the short term, a key factor is pent-up demand. Only a select few policies have been purchased during the past year, and there are thousands of seniors who are interested in selling their policies as soon as possible.
For institutions, this means that portfolios can be aggregated to specific goals very quickly and at reasonable costs. Providers who have aligned with the new capital sources have an opportunity to grow quickly but with more control over their business.
For agents and brokers, new funding sources are emerging. This will help revive a practice area and profit center that had been dormant. As the industry embraces transparency and new best practices, such as requiring proof-of-funds letters, confidence will begin to rise and the industry will once again flourish.
For consumers, there is great promise. While offers might not be at the levels of a few years ago, the market is coming back. The option to sell an insurance policy for a profit is now available again for seniors. This in itself is an encouraging development.
Improved underwriting and more sophisticated medical exams also work in the consumer’s favor. Some providers are performing in-person paramedical examinations, just like insurance companies at policy origination, to secure the most up-to-date medical picture of policyholders. This improves underwriting and in some cases will help raise offers.
After weathering the perfect storm, the industry is poised for growth. As long as the lessons learned remain at the top of the mind, and the industry is responsible with its capital while always focusing on seniors as the primary client, then the players and the pieces are in place for the life settlement industry to once again flourish.
For the first time in 24 months, the forecast for the life settlement industry is bright, particularly after surviving a perfect storm situation in 2008. The life settlement market was whipsawed two years ago when a dramatic change in life expectancy tables combined with the collapse of the credit markets to nearly cripple the industry.
The fallout was significant: Credit disappeared, hedge funds fled, offers were pulled, some companies folded and consumers ultimately suffered. However, the life settlement business has once again proven to be resilient as funding sources have returned, and the industry has another opportunity to flourish—as long as it is done the right way this time. The companies in our industry need to focus primarily on the long haul, while the goals of the capital sources need to align with the goals of the providers and the rest of the industry.
At the moment, there are a number of large players poised to help bring the industry back to prior glory. But there are challenges ahead. The industry is facing what can be best described as a crisis of confidence, which can be seen at both ends of the business.
At one end, capital sources, including hedge funds and private equity groups, remain wary. Some got burned badly from polluted portfolios containing policies with insurable-interest question marks and origination concerns. Fortunately, regulators have finally cracked-down on stranger-owned policies.
At the other end, there are skeptical agents and brokers who were let down when policy offers were pulled—sometimes inexplicably, often unprofessionally and usually with little or no notice. In between, providers had little control of the situation and were forced to make excuses that left agents and brokers scrambling for answers. It was a difficult time, and the industry as a whole has the scars to prove it.
Looking back, perhaps the industry needed the shake-up, painful as it was. The life settlement industry is unique and challenging. Too many new companies jumped into the business with little experience but a lot of attitude. They quickly secured a bunch of state licenses and started vacuuming up policies without understanding the intricacies of the business. We saw ignorance of origination and insurable interest risks; poor medical underwriting; disregard for transparency and standardization; and a complete lack of understanding of how to track the insured and manage the asset class.
As previously mentioned, the future for the industry is, indeed, bright. Moving forward, the industry needs to address the confidence issues head-on and ensure that these situations never happen again. Foremost, the goals of the providers must be better aligned with the capital. Ideally, the provider companies should have their own capital or a least direct control of the capital. Transparency also emerges again as a key factor. Full disclosure of fees and commissions adds to the industry’s legitimacy, but we need to go even further and begin to present unimpeachable proof of funds when offers are made. This is of tremendous value to brokers, agents and consumers.
In the short term, a key factor is pent-up demand. Only a select few policies have been purchased during the past year, and there are thousands of seniors who are interested in selling their policies as soon as possible.
For institutions, this means that portfolios can be aggregated to specific goals very quickly and at reasonable costs. Providers who have aligned with the new capital sources have an opportunity to grow quickly but with more control over their business.
For agents and brokers, new funding sources are emerging. This will help revive a practice area and profit center that had been dormant. As the industry embraces transparency and new best practices, such as requiring proof-of-funds letters, confidence will begin to rise and the industry will once again flourish.
For consumers, there is great promise. While offers might not be at the levels of a few years ago, the market is coming back. The option to sell an insurance policy for a profit is now available again for seniors. This in itself is an encouraging development.
Improved underwriting and more sophisticated medical exams also work in the consumer’s favor. Some providers are performing in-person paramedical examinations, just like insurance companies at policy origination, to secure the most up-to-date medical picture of policyholders. This improves underwriting and in some cases will help raise offers.
After weathering the perfect storm, the industry is poised for growth. As long as the lessons learned remain at the top of the mind, and the industry is responsible with its capital while always focusing on seniors as the primary client, then the players and the pieces are in place for the life settlement industry to once again flourish.
Monday, June 21, 2010
J.P. Morgan Exiting Life Settlement Market
By Dealflow Media
J.P. Morgan is getting out of the life settlement market, a person familiar with the company said.
The person told The Life Settlements Wire that J.P. Morgan expects to wind down its operation over the next few months.
J.P. Morgan is the second major investment bank to exit the market in recent months. Goldman Sachs said it was leaving the market in January, disappointed in its lack of growth.
J.P. Morgan had entered the business around 2007. It had a smaller operation than its competitors, employing fewer than 10 people in its life finance business, the person familiar with the company said.
Rob Finfer, chief executive of Bethesda, Md.-based life settlement broker Integrity Capital Partners said he hasn’t seen J.P. Morgan purchasing policies for at least a year.
“I would not have referred to them as a major player in the life settlement space,” Finfer said. Still, “I’m disappointed when any funding source decides to leave the space, especially in the environment where we have so many excellent policies for sale.”
J.P. Morgan spokesman Brian Marchiony declined to comment.
J.P. Morgan is getting out of the life settlement market, a person familiar with the company said.
The person told The Life Settlements Wire that J.P. Morgan expects to wind down its operation over the next few months.
J.P. Morgan is the second major investment bank to exit the market in recent months. Goldman Sachs said it was leaving the market in January, disappointed in its lack of growth.
J.P. Morgan had entered the business around 2007. It had a smaller operation than its competitors, employing fewer than 10 people in its life finance business, the person familiar with the company said.
Rob Finfer, chief executive of Bethesda, Md.-based life settlement broker Integrity Capital Partners said he hasn’t seen J.P. Morgan purchasing policies for at least a year.
“I would not have referred to them as a major player in the life settlement space,” Finfer said. Still, “I’m disappointed when any funding source decides to leave the space, especially in the environment where we have so many excellent policies for sale.”
J.P. Morgan spokesman Brian Marchiony declined to comment.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Life Insurers to Settle with Life Settlements?
A recent article in Seeking Alpha examined the love hate relationship between life insurance carriers and the life settlement industry. If the carriers can't beat em, should they join em? Below is an excerpt from Clark Troy's article.
New York Life and the Actuarial Society of Greater New York hosted Michael Fasano of Fasano Associates for a seminar called “Mortality Curves: Lessons from Life Settlement Underwriting” on Friday, May 28. On the face of it, this would not seem very shocking, were it not for the enmity general shown to the life settlements industry by life insurers. Life settlements, and particularly stranger-owned life insurance (STOLI), have in recent years been the bête noire of the life insurance industry. Life insurance trade association the American Council of Life Insurers has vigorously lobbied for strong legislation protecting senior citizens (and its own profitability) from fraudulent life settlement origination such as STOLI, and large states and key life settlements markets such as New York and California have enacted such laws. The life settlements industry, acknowledging that the unsavory practices of STOLI have besmirched its image, also generally supports such legislation.
However, much as it may hate and fear the life settlements industry, life insurers and reinsurers have shown an interest in life expectancy providers such as Fasano Associates (the other two leaders are American Viatical Services and 21st Services), who estimate the longevity of senior citizens who are considering entering into a life settlement transactions. These vendors provide the key data point for evaluating life settlements and, in so doing, have accumulated considerable expertise and data assets for estimating how long older people with health problems are likely to live. This is obviously something life insurers are interested in too. Although the life expectancy providers have had some pretty major hiccups along the way, they’ve acquired enough domain knowledge that insurers are curious.
Could a life insurer or reinsurer seek to partner with or acquire a life expectancy provider? It’s not outside the realm of possibility, but it would depend on pricing, which would in turn depend on how the life settlements market was doing as a whole. For the life settlements market to flourish, institutional investors need to be in a risk-seeking mode. Through the first quarter of 2010, with accommodative fiscal policy successfully encouraging a global risk trade and thinning spreads between sovereign and corporate as well as G20 and emerging market debt, prospects for life settlements -- an asset with non-correlated fixed income like returns – might have been thought to be encouraging, although in fact the flows of capital towards life settlements slowed. The big institutional investors to date have been German, primarily pension funds, and German institutional investors have other things on their minds these days.
Originally Published - Seeking Alpha, Jun 2, 2010
New York Life and the Actuarial Society of Greater New York hosted Michael Fasano of Fasano Associates for a seminar called “Mortality Curves: Lessons from Life Settlement Underwriting” on Friday, May 28. On the face of it, this would not seem very shocking, were it not for the enmity general shown to the life settlements industry by life insurers. Life settlements, and particularly stranger-owned life insurance (STOLI), have in recent years been the bête noire of the life insurance industry. Life insurance trade association the American Council of Life Insurers has vigorously lobbied for strong legislation protecting senior citizens (and its own profitability) from fraudulent life settlement origination such as STOLI, and large states and key life settlements markets such as New York and California have enacted such laws. The life settlements industry, acknowledging that the unsavory practices of STOLI have besmirched its image, also generally supports such legislation.
However, much as it may hate and fear the life settlements industry, life insurers and reinsurers have shown an interest in life expectancy providers such as Fasano Associates (the other two leaders are American Viatical Services and 21st Services), who estimate the longevity of senior citizens who are considering entering into a life settlement transactions. These vendors provide the key data point for evaluating life settlements and, in so doing, have accumulated considerable expertise and data assets for estimating how long older people with health problems are likely to live. This is obviously something life insurers are interested in too. Although the life expectancy providers have had some pretty major hiccups along the way, they’ve acquired enough domain knowledge that insurers are curious.
Could a life insurer or reinsurer seek to partner with or acquire a life expectancy provider? It’s not outside the realm of possibility, but it would depend on pricing, which would in turn depend on how the life settlements market was doing as a whole. For the life settlements market to flourish, institutional investors need to be in a risk-seeking mode. Through the first quarter of 2010, with accommodative fiscal policy successfully encouraging a global risk trade and thinning spreads between sovereign and corporate as well as G20 and emerging market debt, prospects for life settlements -- an asset with non-correlated fixed income like returns – might have been thought to be encouraging, although in fact the flows of capital towards life settlements slowed. The big institutional investors to date have been German, primarily pension funds, and German institutional investors have other things on their minds these days.
Originally Published - Seeking Alpha, Jun 2, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Texas called Wild West Of Life Settlements.
As most know, life settlement legislation varies from state to state. Texas has been pegged as the "Wild West" for life settlements by Dave Lieber of the Star Telegram. He asserts that lax regulation and oversight fuel fly by night schemes. I can't disagree more from a life settlement broker's perspective. Their compliance requirements are thorough and involved. In fact, they have to approve every single page of a life settlement broker's website before it can be considered in compliance. Nonetheless, he has an interesting point of view. Below is an excerpt so you can make up your own mind:
Ninety-nine years ago, legendary U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote an opinion that a life insurance policy was a person's property and could be sold.
A century later, the concept has morphed into "life settlement" contracts, also called "death bets" or "death contracts."
People who need quick cash can sell their policies to licensed brokers, who then sell them to third-party investors.
The investors pay the premiums until the person dies. Then all the benefits go to the investors instead of the original beneficiaries. If someone lives longer than expected, investors may lose money. Otherwise, the investor wins.
"You're betting on death," says Joe Rotunda, director of the Texas State Securities Board's enforcement division. "You're betting somebody is going to die by a certain date and you're not going to have to shell out any additional money until you see a return on your investment. It sounds good, but there's a lot of risk involved."
Life insurance policies are often bundled together and sold on Wall Street. These are called "death bonds." Investors don't know whose policies they are buying.
Under Texas law, policies sold this way must be registered as securities. But in practice, some life settlement contracts are kept off the grid. Brokers aren't always licensed, and the policies they sell aren't registered. That can lead to fraud.
In fact, Rotunda says of the Texas life settlement industry, "It is the Wild West."
"It's always been a problem, but the amount of fraud we're seeing now has, anecdotally, increased tremendously," he said.
As enforcement division chief, Rotunda leads investigations into life settlement cases. In April, the board accused a Plano company of not being licensed and registered and of making misleading promises to investors. Deception is a key component of making a case for securities fraud.
But enforcement is tough. Life settlements are not regulated as thoroughly as much of the rest of the insurance and securities market, Rotunda says. One problem: The term life settlement does not appear in the Texas Securities Act.
That means each allegation of fraud has to be individually examined to see if it can meet the broad terms for securities described in state law.
"It's not as straightforward or black-and-white as it would be in other states," Rotunda says.
That has made Texas attractive to some slick operators, others say.
"Texas is a hot spot," says Gloria Wolk, a North Carolina-based consumer advocate who focuses on life settlement fraud. "Texas has more people working as brokers and providers than any other state because they don't provide oversight. There is no regulation. When things get really hot about some company, with too many complaints, then the state goes and does something."
Rotunda acknowledges that his hands are sometimes tied by the law but says his agency still goes after those who break the rules.
Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/05/01/2156969/texas-is-the-wild-west-of-life.html#ixzz0v1CUYfqf
Ninety-nine years ago, legendary U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. wrote an opinion that a life insurance policy was a person's property and could be sold.
A century later, the concept has morphed into "life settlement" contracts, also called "death bets" or "death contracts."
People who need quick cash can sell their policies to licensed brokers, who then sell them to third-party investors.
The investors pay the premiums until the person dies. Then all the benefits go to the investors instead of the original beneficiaries. If someone lives longer than expected, investors may lose money. Otherwise, the investor wins.
"You're betting on death," says Joe Rotunda, director of the Texas State Securities Board's enforcement division. "You're betting somebody is going to die by a certain date and you're not going to have to shell out any additional money until you see a return on your investment. It sounds good, but there's a lot of risk involved."
Life insurance policies are often bundled together and sold on Wall Street. These are called "death bonds." Investors don't know whose policies they are buying.
Under Texas law, policies sold this way must be registered as securities. But in practice, some life settlement contracts are kept off the grid. Brokers aren't always licensed, and the policies they sell aren't registered. That can lead to fraud.
In fact, Rotunda says of the Texas life settlement industry, "It is the Wild West."
"It's always been a problem, but the amount of fraud we're seeing now has, anecdotally, increased tremendously," he said.
As enforcement division chief, Rotunda leads investigations into life settlement cases. In April, the board accused a Plano company of not being licensed and registered and of making misleading promises to investors. Deception is a key component of making a case for securities fraud.
But enforcement is tough. Life settlements are not regulated as thoroughly as much of the rest of the insurance and securities market, Rotunda says. One problem: The term life settlement does not appear in the Texas Securities Act.
That means each allegation of fraud has to be individually examined to see if it can meet the broad terms for securities described in state law.
"It's not as straightforward or black-and-white as it would be in other states," Rotunda says.
That has made Texas attractive to some slick operators, others say.
"Texas is a hot spot," says Gloria Wolk, a North Carolina-based consumer advocate who focuses on life settlement fraud. "Texas has more people working as brokers and providers than any other state because they don't provide oversight. There is no regulation. When things get really hot about some company, with too many complaints, then the state goes and does something."
Rotunda acknowledges that his hands are sometimes tied by the law but says his agency still goes after those who break the rules.
Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/05/01/2156969/texas-is-the-wild-west-of-life.html#ixzz0v1CUYfqf
Monday, March 1, 2010
Goldman Sachs Exits Life Settlements
National Financial Partners Corp. has taken on full ownership of Institutional Life Services LLC, a venture that The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. recently exited.
Institutional Life Services LLC started out in 2007 as a venture between NFP, affiliates of Goldman and Genworth Financial Inc. Back then, it was intended to act as a life settlement exchange.
Genworth and Goldman have since pulled out of the investment, but. According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, NFP took on full ownership of the enterprise in December.
ILS will act as a life settlement provider, rather than as a life settlement index, according to the filing. NFP also bought full ownership of Institutional Life Administration LLC.
NFP’s acquisition of the full ILS business came just before Goldman announced its departure from the life settlements arena by shuttering its QxX mortality index and closing down Longmore Capital, a life settlements provider.
Goldman’s vision of a booming institutional market simply wasn’t bearing fruit, Goldman spokesman Michael DuVally had said.
NFP has been a player on the retail side of the life settlements business. Some of its affiliates provide those services to investors who want to sell an unneeded policy.
That corner of the business hasn’t always been simple, though. NFP’s commission and fee revenue declined last year to $948.3 million, from $1.15 billion in 2008. The dropoff stemmed, in large part, from falling sales of the company’s retail life and life settlements products, which tend to be high-commission products
Further, the company’s affiliates have had a number of legal brushes related to life settlements. Media personality Larry King sued NFP-affiliated firm The Meltzer Group Inc. in 2007 for breach of fiduciary duty. He claimed he was told to buy $10 million in life insurance coverage and then sell it to another party for $550,000. Mr. King received a settlement in that claim.
In another suit filed last year in Ohio, Louis Levin, an 81-year-ancient investor, claimed NFP-affiliate Howard Kaye Insurance Agency Inc. — along with principal Howard Kaye and Barry Kaye and Associates Inc. — advised him to buy a $5 million policy. According to the suit, the defendants told Mr. Levin he would earn a “substantial profit” for selling the policy on the life settlements market. The firm wasn’t able to locate buyers, and Mr. Levin wound up spending $322,000 on premiums. He is suing for breach of contract. NFP itself was not named in any of these suits.
Institutional Life Services LLC started out in 2007 as a venture between NFP, affiliates of Goldman and Genworth Financial Inc. Back then, it was intended to act as a life settlement exchange.
Genworth and Goldman have since pulled out of the investment, but. According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, NFP took on full ownership of the enterprise in December.
ILS will act as a life settlement provider, rather than as a life settlement index, according to the filing. NFP also bought full ownership of Institutional Life Administration LLC.
NFP’s acquisition of the full ILS business came just before Goldman announced its departure from the life settlements arena by shuttering its QxX mortality index and closing down Longmore Capital, a life settlements provider.
Goldman’s vision of a booming institutional market simply wasn’t bearing fruit, Goldman spokesman Michael DuVally had said.
NFP has been a player on the retail side of the life settlements business. Some of its affiliates provide those services to investors who want to sell an unneeded policy.
That corner of the business hasn’t always been simple, though. NFP’s commission and fee revenue declined last year to $948.3 million, from $1.15 billion in 2008. The dropoff stemmed, in large part, from falling sales of the company’s retail life and life settlements products, which tend to be high-commission products
Further, the company’s affiliates have had a number of legal brushes related to life settlements. Media personality Larry King sued NFP-affiliated firm The Meltzer Group Inc. in 2007 for breach of fiduciary duty. He claimed he was told to buy $10 million in life insurance coverage and then sell it to another party for $550,000. Mr. King received a settlement in that claim.
In another suit filed last year in Ohio, Louis Levin, an 81-year-ancient investor, claimed NFP-affiliate Howard Kaye Insurance Agency Inc. — along with principal Howard Kaye and Barry Kaye and Associates Inc. — advised him to buy a $5 million policy. According to the suit, the defendants told Mr. Levin he would earn a “substantial profit” for selling the policy on the life settlements market. The firm wasn’t able to locate buyers, and Mr. Levin wound up spending $322,000 on premiums. He is suing for breach of contract. NFP itself was not named in any of these suits.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
European Life Settlement Trade
As the life settlement market struggles to recover from a tough 2008 and 2009, a group of American life settlement representatives are embarking on a European trade mission. This is exactly the kind of proactive thinking that we need more of in the industry to lift from the difficult times we are now facing. The idea is to cultivate international activity in the US longevity market. Below is an excerpt of the press release.
LUXEMBOURG, February 08, 2010 -- Carlisle Management Company, a leading alternative assets manager and manager of the Luxembourg Long Term Growth Life Settlement Fund, today announced its sponsorship of the First European Life Settlements Trade Mission.
"We are extremely pleased to be a part of the foundation for a European based life settlement organization, ELSA sets standards for the European life settlement industry and promotes transparency by providing accurate, authoritative information to the investment community," said Tim Mol, Carlisle's Chief Operating Officer.
A life settlement is the transfer of ownership and beneficiary rights of an unwanted or unneeded life insurance policy in exchange for a cash settlement. Life settlements represent an estimated $12 billion annual secondary market and one of the fastest growing financial sectors today. As capital sources continue to search for stable returns and low volatility, life settlements are already playing a significant role in the asset allocation strategies of leading banks, financial institutions, insurance companies and mutual funds.
LUXEMBOURG, February 08, 2010 -- Carlisle Management Company, a leading alternative assets manager and manager of the Luxembourg Long Term Growth Life Settlement Fund, today announced its sponsorship of the First European Life Settlements Trade Mission.
"We are extremely pleased to be a part of the foundation for a European based life settlement organization, ELSA sets standards for the European life settlement industry and promotes transparency by providing accurate, authoritative information to the investment community," said Tim Mol, Carlisle's Chief Operating Officer.
A life settlement is the transfer of ownership and beneficiary rights of an unwanted or unneeded life insurance policy in exchange for a cash settlement. Life settlements represent an estimated $12 billion annual secondary market and one of the fastest growing financial sectors today. As capital sources continue to search for stable returns and low volatility, life settlements are already playing a significant role in the asset allocation strategies of leading banks, financial institutions, insurance companies and mutual funds.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)