Prudential

Star Empty star Empty star Empty star Empty star
1.0 out of 5, based on 1 ratings and
11 reviews & complaints.
www.prudential.com

Most Popular | Newest | More Options >
More filter options:
Insurance Nightmare - Prudential steals money and cancels policies
Posted by on
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA -- In 2005 I received a notice from the IRS that Prudential Insurance had filed a1099-R in the amount of $32,329.27 for a loan against my life insurance policy that Prudential was “writing off/paying off”. Prudential never sent me a copy of the 1099 (the IES did), so I also had to pay penalties.
I ended up paying the IRS approximately $3,500 for this, $ 3,051 plus interest, and the California Franchise Tax Board about $1,500. I also had liens placed on my house, and my bank account.
I tried, for quite some time to get a statement of my account from Prudential
with little results. My last 2 (yearly) statements were completely blank.
I started getting suspicious and I called Prudential several times to get a statement, and kept getting all sorts of OTHER forms instead. After insisting, I finally got a statement from Prudential.
Prudential states that I STILL OWE THEM THE MONEY (plus 5 years of interest added to it, about $2,000 per year).
In a letter from Prudential (Dec. 2009), they state that they are required to report any taxable gain. Yet as of December 31, 2004 there was NO gain (the end of tax year 2004). In their letter dated 2009 they verify that the policy was reinstated and the loan “pay off” was reversed on March 4, 2004, 9 months before the end of that tax year (just barely over one month after payments were missed), and Prudentials account statement dated March 2005 (for the previous year) also verifies that the loan “pay off” was reversed. March 4, 2004 is 9 months before the end of that tax year, yet Prudential filed a 1099 anyway. Why did Prudential file a 1099 when they ADMIT there were NO gains for 2004?
Prudential explains that the reportable tax gain is the loan repay amount minus the cost basis, then in the next paragraph they again verify that the “pay off” was REVERSED.
Prudential says that they have no responsibility in the fact that I had to (wrongfully) pay
$5,000 in State and Federal taxes on the gains that they (falsely) reported. Even they have verified (in writing) that this was falsely reported, and that there was NO gain. Prudential gave an explanation of their actions by explaining the “letter” of the law that justifies their action. Of course the objective of that law, and their ethics were never mentioned, nor was there any apology for costing me $5,000.
I had liens placed on my house, my bank account, and the IRS threatened to attach my Social
Security checks, all because of a fraudulent 1099 from Prudential.
I would like to see a copy of the letter informing the IRS and me that the “pay off” was reversed. Let me guess, they are not required by law to inform anyone that they screwed up. The IRS says that my only recourse with them is to obtain a tax attorney, at my expense of course.
This policy has been in effect for 46 years, yet payments 5 minutes late, and the policy goes into default, in the hopes that they can find cause to cancel the policy and pocket the money.
My mother had a life insurance policy with Prudential for over 40 years, when she died I called Prudential (I’m the beneficiary), they said that the policy had lapsed just before she died, how convenient, they pocketed about $75,000.
How many people have they screwed using these practices?
Prudential was obviously not acting in “good faith”, on in my interest.
There is this new thing out, it is called Ethics, look it up.
Prudentials actions are illegal, unethical, and despicable. You are defrauding the IRS and me, and on top of that you are stealing from me.
The people of this country are sick of business practices like yours, if you have not noticed.
     
Read 10 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

Anonymous on 2009-12-11:
You need to file an amendment on that years taxes (if you still can) to receive a refund of the over payment, IF the IRS agrees you are due one. Prudential is correct though: every taxable instance has to be filed, the 1099 AND the reversal. You can't just say to the IRS 'oh there was no gain so I am not going to add the 1099'. They had to file BOTH forms.

Your issue is with the IRS now. Prudential filed the necessary forms for their tax year, both the gains and the losses.

That is what it sounds like to me. Kind of like with my candle business: I have to file ALL income AND expense paperwork. I can't say 'my expenses were more than my income therefore I won't file the 1099'. All forms have to be filed and the IRS decides my liability based on earns and expenses.
Anonymous on 2009-12-11:
Not true LadyScot. If you are self employed (own a business) you don't have to file a return if your net earnings are less than $400.

I really don't have a good enough understanding of this review to offer any helpful advice other than contact a tax attorney. Good luck.
Anonymous on 2009-12-11:
This is a little bit confusing, but it sounds like you defaulted on a loan which you took against your life insurance policy. When a loan is defaulted and the lender writes off the unpaid balance, that balance is considered income to you, and is taxable.
Prudential is correct tha you would still owe them the money, but if you paid it off, you'd be able to adjust your taxes accordingly.

If all this isn't the case, I apologize, your post was a little confusing.
JR in Orlando on 2009-12-11:
Years ago I had problems with this when I tried to buy and sell stocks - unsuccessfully. Forms are needed for each sale and purchase. I was surprised when I got a 1099 from the stock broker for the $30,000.00 in sales receipts. I had to go back and file the forms to show the $35,000.00 in purchases instead of simply no gain for the year. This was about 80 transactions of $200.00 to $500.00 which took forever to straighten out. I learned then that a 1099 is sent even if there is no profit.
Anonymous on 2009-12-11:
Stew, my income averages $4500 or a bit more or less each year so I have to file everything. What stinks is that the first year I filed, no one told me I had to claim a self employed tax. Ended up penalized but it wasn't much. I learned fast to learn and claim EVERYTHING after that lol.

My post was an example of talking to the tax man since the OP did not know why the insurance company filed the form. I don't understand insurance loans but I do know enough NOT to mess with the IRS, and I am sure Prudential isn't going to.
Anonymous on 2009-12-11:
LadyScot, $4500 for a home business is awesome. Very impressive. I wish you continued growth in your entrepreneurial endeavor.
Anonymous on 2009-12-11:
Thank you Stew. It isn't enough to stop me from visiting Wally everyday, but I love candles, and if I am going to sell something might as well be something I love. :) But it does help me have play money.
jerryg25 on 2009-12-12:
Prudential never filed a reversal with the IRS (or with me), they never even sent me the 1099.
the IRS penalized me for not filing it, I knew nothing about it
Nohandle on 2009-12-12:
Jerry, I don't know anything about your dealings with Prudential but do know how wonderful it is to deal with our pals at the IRS and a tax attorney. I can't believe the IRS told you to consult a tax attorney. Most times they hope you won't. They aren't too keen on being found wrong. When the dust has cleared you might very well prove your case but there's still that tidy little bill from the tax attorney. I've always heard "ignorance of the law is no excuse" so I guess that's still the thinking.

I never received a 1099 from a company last year and informed my CPA. He checked into it and got it taken care of. The difference was I knew I was due a 1099, you weren't. In my case they claimed one had been mailed. Hello. Strange how it took them a while to produce one.

Thanks for the heads up on your experience with Prudential. As far as the government goes we all need to "pay our fair share" right? Try dealing with them.
Nvestig8or on 2010-12-10:
The IRS has too ~much~ authority and too ~little~ accountability, imho. I don't know where you live, Jerry, but, with the competition between attorneys, these days, maybe you could get one that would get back your tax money AND the court costs, if you can find one with the guts to take on both Prudential ~and~ the IRS. However, even though the expense to you was excessive, the potential income for an attorney would probably not be considered worth their while. At the risk of sounding like an alarmist, until we reclaim control of our government, this kind of injustice is going to continue; again, imho. God bless!
Close commentsAdd reply
Life Insurance Held Hostage By Prudential's Bad Faith And Greed
Posted by on
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA -- Prudential Life Insurance is holding HOSTAGE proceeds from 2 life insurance policies my father paid on 50 years before he died in June 2008. They say the beneficiaries are in dispute but keep delaying the one action that can settle this dispute - filing an Interpleader Action. For 8 weeks now this corporation (The Rock) keeps saying they intend to file this action which will allow the Courts to decide my father’s intent as to who is supposed to get the money, but in California this action requires the Insurance Company to deposit the death benefit money with the court. In essence the money will be paid out and this is something no insurance company wants to to, They want all the premium money they can get but don’t really want to pay any money out.

The longer Prudential practices this BAD FAITH tactic to delay paying out on these policies, the greater the chances are that my family will lose a home that has been in our family for 50 years.

The company has in their possession a copy of both my father’s Trust and Living Will plus a hand written note all expressing his final wishes as to who the undisputed beneficiary truly should be, yet they continue to delay taking any action to resolve this issue so the money can be paid to the family.

This is an outrage and another fine example of corporate greed. The Rock has no integrity whatsoever and no heart either. This company should be ashamed of their very transparent efforts to retain money they have no right to keep from those my father paid (50 years) to provide for after his death.

We have complained to the California State Insurance Commissioner and I have even sent a FAX to the CEO John R. Strangfeld Jr., with no results thus far.

     
Read 5 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

madconsumer on 2008-08-17:
I just went through this with my mother's estate. it took the courts 8 weeks to solve the issues once it was filed.

I as well, work in hr, and I can tell you, I make sure all of our new employees understand the process if a benificary is not chosen. I more or less make them enter one. all benificaries can be changed any time. only time a court will not accept a change, is if the person making hte change was not mentally able to do so. and the courts will decide this fact.

some estates have drug on and on in court.
BobJohn on 2008-08-18:
I am not being nasty but your father is to blame. It sounds like he did not have specified his beneficiaries on the policy. Insurance policies have specific beneficiaries, if he didn't make it clear on the policy (not other documents) who the beneficiaries are then the insurance company can't just pay out the amount, they have to go to the courts to make the decision as to who should be receiving the proceeds. The insurance is not keeping the money for themselves, only trying to find out through the courts who should get it. I hope the matter is resolved soon for you, I've dealt with a drawn out probate process and it is a real pain.
imnashvillebound on 2009-04-29:
My 8 year old son is the beneficiary of his fathers life insurance. His father died over a year ago. Although I'm his mother Prudential would not even speak to me until I went to court and became the guardian of my sons estate. They said after I did that they would issue the monies. I went to court and the judge appointed me guardian of his estate, she instructed me to send the guardianship papers to Prudential and return on a certain date to prove the funds were in a blocked account until my son reaches 18. I provided Prudential with the paperwork but was told it wasn't enough that I now needed a court order. To make a long frustrating story short, guardianship papers, filing for the money to be released, one attorney (who has written them several times and made many phones calls) and thousands of dollars on legal bills later they still have not issued the payment. In California the money goes into an account where no money can be withdrawn by anyone except my son when he turns 18 so it isn't mine and now he's 8 and we have been trying to get what is rightfully his since he was 7.
vietvet on 2009-07-06:
PRU sales reps are liars who will say anything to make a sale. Following 2 strokes every insurance policy I have granted LIFETIME wavier-of-premium - EXCEPT PRU! They demand a "re-certification" of my disability via physical at MY expense. Then PRU keeps annoying the doctor for 'more information' - finally the doc drops me and I need to find another.

PRU feels they have "won" by an avalanche of paperwork to me and forcing me to change doctors after PRU hassles the doc.

My 'piece of the rock' is more like a piece of something else
Slammed by Rock on 2009-07-06:
Well put! I am sorry about your dilemma. I will include you in my prayers!
Close commentsAdd reply
Unreasonable service fees
Posted by on
DUBUQUE, IOWA -- On February 16, 2010 I requested that Prudential close out my 401k account and rollover / transfer it to my Schwab IRA. They did roll over the account, although it took them 5 days, and charged me $50 for this transfer. I then received a statement two months later showing an ending value as of 3/31/2010 of $0.00.

On September 20, 2010 I received another statement that said I still had $99.72 in my account. I called again on September 21, 2010, told the person this account should have been closed out in February (per my instructions) and requested Prudential again close out the account and rollover / transfer it to a Schwab IRA. The phone personal assured me twice that no charges would be added on this transfer.

On September 25, 2010 I receive a letter from Prudential saying they are transferring only $49.04 to my Schwab account. This is a $50.68 service charge that they said they would not add.

On September 27, 2010 I called the Prudential retirement line (877-778-2100) to complain about the additional $50 service charge. The phone personal answered the line and originally said that there were no charges but after several holds admitted that $99.72 was available in my 401(K) and only $49.04 was transferred to my Schwab Plan. Then the phone personal said the charge was normal and customary - no matter that I tried to close the account out in February and had already been charged a $50 transfer fee. He said he could do noting about it.

Unfortunately the Prudential service was inadequate and misleading. I am disappointed because they did not do what they said they would do and not charge the second service charge. An ethical business should have no games, no gimmicks, no gotchaas that I have to deal with. I think the second transfer fee is unreasonable and that the original transfer fee should have covered any transfer. This is not an ethical company.
     
Read 1 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

trmn8r on 2010-09-28:
As a Prudential stockholder, the fact they got an extra $50 from you might normally please me. But this is completely inappropriate, IMO.
This $99.72 that showed up was probably a dividend of some kind that was paid after the transfer. I previously transferred a non-IRA investement account to a brokerage, and they transferred the residual receipts automatically without charge.

I just last week transferred my IRA from one firm to another. The charge was supposed to be $25. I better go check.

Prudential seems to have treated you unfairly. I'm sorry this happened to you.
Close commentsAdd reply
StarEmpty StarEmpty StarEmpty StarEmpty Star
401k
Posted by on
Rating: 1/51
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA -- I'm going through some difficult times and I tried to get a hardship withdrawal. I filed and faxed all the paperwork. I called to see if it had been approved but they said it couldn't be because the landlord needed to evict me. My landlord called them and told them once they start the process they couldn't take any money from me the guy told them just to evict me!!!! The landlord said sir she will be homeless. Then he said they could approve me after I'm fully evicted!!!!! So, I have to see what else I could do but I will never have my money with them to have this mentality towards their customers is unbelievable!!!!
     
Read 3 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

DebtorBasher on 2013-07-26:
Sometimes, it's worth taking the early withdraw penalty. I don't know how much that would be for you, but it may be your only choice.
trmn8r on 2013-07-26:
It sounds like the bottom line is you need to be evicted in order to get the hardship. That would be pretty simple, and I don't believe it reflects a "mentality" beyond the rules. There is no in between - it is called hardship for a reason, and I believe the guidelines could be dictated by the IRS. The only reason for the landlord and Pru to speak would be to verify you were evicted. I don't know what else would be expected from that chat.

Basher's advice is good if you are on the verge of being kicked into the street. Otherwise, financial advisors would generally advise against it.
trmn8r on 2013-07-26:
OK, so the IRS rule says that you must need the funds to avoid eviction.

Therefore, a gray area arises. Seems like you would have to be a month behind on your rent for the landlord to agree you are on the verge of eviction. If the rent hasn't yet come due that you can't pay, that doesn't count.

It sounds like the second-hand conversation between the landlord and Pru suffered from this conundrum - if you qualify for eviction and the LL initiates it, he can't take money from you.

It's a chicken and egg situation - unless the eviction process accounts for an emergency payment "undoing" it, you are at risk. Pru can't do anything about that.
Close commentsAdd reply
Prudential Life Insurance is a Nightmare!
Posted by on
My father purchased Prudential life insurance coverage for me back in 1991, and has been paying his premium every month since his death in February 2011. I have ben attempting to take ownership of the policy to cash it out and I have ben getting nowhere with this dishonest company. the Prudential representatives are saying my brother is the rightful owner of the policy despite proof to the contrary! makes no sense at all. They have lied and delayed my rights for months now and I'm getting fed up. DO NOT PURCHASE PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE. THEY ARE UNETHICAL YOU WILL BE GIVEN THE RUN AROUND!
     
Read 2 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

trmn8r on 2011-07-24:
I have found Prudential to be an outstanding an honest company. My parents bought me a policy in the 60's, and my mom had her own policy with them. When mom died, it could not have been easier to deal with Prudential - the reps were very nice, helpful and efficient.

Finally, about 8 years ago, Prudential *gave* policy holders stock - I got about $2500 worth as I recall.

Clearly your issue involves a beneficiary or ownership issue. Was this policy on your dad's life? Why is your brother considered by Pru to be the beneficiary or owner? What proof have you provided to the contrary?

How have they acted "unethically"?
*Brenda* on 2011-07-24:
I work with estates so I deal with Prudential a lot. I haven't really had a problem with them. What it seems like is that your brother was the contingent owner, making him the primary owner when your father died.

When the company demutualized (converted to a stock company) they gave policy holders stock as trmn8r says so you might want to check into that if you have not already, your father may have some stock in his name.
Close commentsAdd reply
Between the "Rock" and a hard place.
Posted by on
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA -- In 1993 I purchased a Variable Annuity life insurance policy from Prudential Insurance Company. I specified and was "guaranteed" a policy that would be paid "in-full" in twelve years, thereby coinciding with my retirement age.

After paying the premiums for 144 consecutive months by electronic transfer of funds, Prudential advised me that the policy was not "paid-in-full" and would probably take three more years.

After the next three years of paying premiums, not only was the policy not paid up but Prudential raised my premiums by 60% with the terms of premiums then being indefinite.

During all this there was much communication with the company and my state insurance commission to no avail. The company chose, (rather than to negotiate a settlement with me), to cloak themselves in litigious edict and deny any obligation to contractual responsibility.

As it became obvious that Prudential is not reputable and paying more premiums was just whistling by the graveyard, I canceled the policy and THEY kept my 15 years of premiums. Better to lose $30,000 than possibly another thirty to fifty thousand.

I have now noticed that many people have posted similar stories and it's apparent that Prudential can fleece us with immunity and, with us having no recourse, continue to post outrageous annual earnings statements.
I would recommend that anyone invested in any of Prudential's products liquidate them as soon as is rational. And, anyone wishing to purchase these types of products should look elsewhere.
     
Read 0 RepliesAdd reply
Prudential Life Insurance Scam
Posted by on
NEWARK, NEW JERSEY -- I have been attempting to collect my 401k account money since I left my company in July. I have been transferred around, given false tracking numbers which the UPS mentioned were for return products such as t-shirts. I have been promised it would be delivered through the post office, UPS by ground and UPS by overnight with signature. From July 2010 through present (January 2011) they have not returned my calls and have left me in the dark. I feel as though I will never see the money I worked so hard for. Do the right thing and contact the BBB if you have experienced this! This is a scam!
     
Read 1 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

trmn8r on 2011-01-08:
Prudential Life is an *excellent* old company. My mom's life ins was with them, and mine is as well. I highly doubt Pru is perpetrating a scam. Buying life insurance through a 401K is tricky. Here is a snippet from http://smallbusinessreview.com/for_the_boss/How_To_Buy_Life_Insurance_in_a_401k/index2.html

"If you terminate the plan (as a business decision) or leave the company you will probably have to buy out or surrender the life insurance coverage. As a business owner this is probably not much of an issue since you are in control of the 401(k) plan investment options and likely the only one choosing the life insurance option.

Lindsey Wilkins, Principal, global retirement operations and client reporting for Edward Jones, in St. Louis, cautions, “There aren't many plans that offer this [life insurance] as a typical investment option within the plan. In addition, your plan administrator must be willing to administer plans with life insurance in them. Sometimes there is an additional cost....so check.”

What has your plan admistrator told you?
Close commentsAdd reply
Incorrect Information Given When Purchasing a Home
Posted by on
EAST SETAUKET, NEW YORK -- We chose a home to have inspected and did not do our homework by calling the town for their correct information on the house. Upon inspection we found out that the house was not built in the year stated on the listing and that it was built 28 years earlier than specified. We were also not informed that it was an estate sale and was told that the owner rented out houses, so we assumed that its being vacant was because that the renter had moved out.

The inspection came out poorly and the home would need over $100,000 worth of work which we could not afford so we declined to purchase the home. Yes, we were out $470 dollars, but we did choose to inspect the house but it was the principle of the matter that was really at stake here. The money was minimal compared to what would have happened if we said yes to the purchase.

Prudential Real Estate only backed their brokers, of course and would not even acknowledge that in business most of the time the consumer is usually right and catered to in a different manner. We were also informed that there was another bid on the house and thus this meant that we would have to bid higher to have the owner accept our bid.

Prudential stated that the owner had given them the wrong information about the house when all they had to do was to call the town and verify the information such as the age of the house, the taxes and the internal square footage.

I guess it is true to say that the buyer should beware! They did not like our inspector from the start and tried to get us to use others. Also, after studying the listings for over 2 years now, I have found that most real estate listing information is not accurate and of course, at the bottom of the page, it almost states that they are not responsible for mistakes. So when you go to buy a home, make sure that you verify all information with the correct town assessor and not be fooled by any such MISTAKES, including errors in taxes, age of the home and square footage, etc.
     
Read 4 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

Anonymous on 2009-11-24:
My house info shows it was built in 1972. However, the actual construction was done sometime before the 20's. My home used to be the old school house before the elementary school was built in the 50's. My house was converted to a residential dwelling in early 1972, thus the latter info being displayed if you look at my assessment.

Depending on when the home was actually constructed, or remodeled, or if any type of landlocking or any number of disputes or errors can be unearthed, you will sometimes find that the date of construction on a deed can be later than is true.

The first actual living condition is usually what is put on the deed. There is another name for it but I can't recall what. You have to do a dded and title search to locate any relevant info.

What would the fact that it was an estate sale have to do with anything? The only matter wold be the payoff of debt by the estate to the courts for creditors and inheritances, which would have nothing to do with you.

The owner could have owned more property and rented them out. That has nothing to do with the home you are buying or whether he lived in it or not.

Anytime you buy a house that you did not build or was not a recent build you can always expect to have some work to put into it. THAT is why you pay for an inspection and appraisal.
redmx3racer on 2009-11-24:
I think that is why you pay for a home inspection. When I bought my house I paid for 2 to be done with poor results before I found my house.
JR in Orlando on 2009-11-24:
With the computer records now available in many places, it does not take long to go back through the chain of title and get an idea of what has occurred (although this will not suffice for a title search). In Orange County, Florida the tax appraiser's office is very helpful and has always been glad to help with finding this information out.
raveis-problems on 2010-05-14:
I am having the same problem with William Raveis in Connecticut. One of their agents made a material mistatement about the age of the air conditioning unit, basically saying it was 3 years old. Inspection showed it was 12 years old.

So instead of getting a new, efficient A/C, William Raveis backed their broker and basically said get the sellers to pay for it or back out of the deal. I think most agencies are just out to get their commission, regardless of the method. It is not an ethical business.
Close commentsAdd reply
Prudential is not an honest company.
Posted by on
NEWARK, NEW JERSEY -- In Nov of 1955 when my first daughter was born, I took out an educational policy for her, for 800 dollars to be paid when she reached 18.
In June of 1957, I did the same thing for my second child. 800 dollar policy to be paid when she reached the age of 18
Then in March of 1968, I took out the same kind of policy for my son. Educational policy to be paid when he reached age 18.
54 years have passed and the policies have still not been paid out. Prudential sent a man to my house each month, for the money, but my children never saw a penny of it. They collected the money, each month, but my oldest daughter is now a Professor, my second daughter is a teacher/director , and my son works in WalMart. Carolina. How I wish I had chosen an honest company to have my policies with. Do not make the same mistake as I, choose a reputable, honest company. I have written the home company and they do not even bother to write back.
I am now thinking of taking Prudential to court, and asking for interest on the 2400 dollars. It would be worth what I pay the lawyer to finally bring Prudential to justice. Thank You for reading.
     
Read 2 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

JR in Orlando on 2009-11-13:
The problem you may have is the statute of limitations on bringing a lawsuit. States have limitations on how long you have to bring a lawsuit once you know of your claim. This is to avoid people bringing stale claims long after witnesses and paperwork has disappeared. The last child turned 18 in 1986, so that has been 23 years for his case and even longer for the others. I would consult an attorney, but that may be an issue.

I would think you would have better luck with the insurance commission in your state. They may be able to help recover on the policy, regardless of when it was due.
Anne2 on 2009-11-14:
I have been trying for years in my home state, I went to the office of the Prudential insurance collecter, the man who came each month and collected the money. He and his wife were God Parents of my son. He was so sure all I had to do was give them the childrens names and collect the insurance money. He was retired from Prudential. And the people there told me with straight faces they had never heard of the three policies. Thanks anyway for your suggestion.
Close commentsAdd reply
Prudential Life Insurance Policy
Posted by on
CALIFORNIA -- I was left as beneficiary of a life insurance policy.

Because someone contested it Prudential will not pay benefits. They turned the case into sending me a summons for court.

So instead of a beneficiary like I am named I am a victim of the courts now. Pay up Prudential.

The policy was paid for and the person dies. Prudential won't honor it????

What kind of a rip???
     
Read 10 RepliesAdd reply

User Replies:

Cyane on 2008-01-09:
Prudential isn't "ripping" you off. If a policy is contested, the policy funds are deposited into a trust account. After the court decides, the trust is then distributed. You probably should look into getting an attorney.
Anonymous on 2008-01-09:
I am guessing that the person doing the contesting is under the believe that you were named benificiary fraudulently. The insurance company certainly wouldn't pay your claim until the matter is settled in court.
Hugh_Jorgen on 2008-01-09:
Like the others said, don't blame Prudential. The law is clear as to what they have to do when a claim is contested. I would be more concerned about my upcoming court hearing than going online to bash an insurance company.
Principissa on 2008-01-09:
I agree with Robf. We went through a similar ordeal when my grandpa passed away. My cousin Joeseph decided that he was owed the entire amount of his policy because he didn't believe that he would leave everything to my kids. Needless to say five years later it is still in litigation, and it was only 5 grand for each child.
jenjenn on 2008-01-09:
I'm sure payment will be made once the courts settle this. This is not Prudential's issue...it would be yours, unfortunately.
BMW DOLL on 2008-01-09:
iIt is also Prudential's fault ,according to an attorney, that they should release funds to the beneficiary. then if the person wants to contest they sue the person.
This is very upsetting to me because the person who passed is not even getting his wishes met when he paid and thought a polcy was secure. any Joe Blow could decide to contest.
Put your thinking cap on.....
GothicSmurf on 2008-01-09:
It is NOT their fault. You put your thinking cap on. If the money is contested BEFORE the release, they can and do hold it and it actually much less of a headache in the end. Sometimes logic overrides sympathy. And any Joe Blow could contest, but only valid claims will make Prudential hold the money. The person has to prove they have a steak in the policy- inheritance.

Basically you are saying you'd rather have the money then be sued (which would cost YOU money) instead of letting Prudential settle it for you with their lawyers for "free"? You sound like a whiny brat.
Hugh_Jorgen on 2008-01-09:
You might want to spend some time finding a better attorney. If the money hasn't been paid out yet, the first thing the other attorney is going to do is file his lawsuit and get a court order blocking Prudential from making the payment prior to the court hearing. Under your plan, you get the money now, spend it, then when the court order goes against you and you have to return some or all of the money you just shrug your shoulders and tell them "too bad, I spent it". The other attorney is one step ahead of you. You might want to start taking this more seriously - people lose cases like this every day.
Anonymous on 2008-01-09:
I am guessing that the person doing the contesting is under the believe that they can rip you off and cheat you out of what is yours. People are greedy by nature and when there is a death involved they come out of the woodworks. Good luck to you
Anonymous on 2008-01-09:
I thought Anna Nicole was dead
Close commentsAdd reply
Top of Page | Next Page >