Gift Cards, Superlatives, and a Replaced Annuity
Agent Delia Park runs a three-person agency. To boost annuity sales, she offers existing clients a $50 gift card for each referral who buys a policy; 14 clients participated last quarter. Her newspaper ad says 'State-Approved Annuity with the Highest Guaranteed Payout' and shows a bar chart comparing her carrier's 10-year surrender charge favorably to competitors. She also replaced a 72-year-old client's existing annuity, which had a $9,800 surrender charge and a 5-year surrender period, with a new 10-year product. The replacement form was signed but the client says Delia did not explain the new surrender schedule or provide a comparison. The client later files a complaint alleging she was misled. The state requires replacement notices and prohibits rebating unless the policy provides for it. Delia's agency also uses a lead vendor that sends text messages to prospects without checking the state's do-not-call list.
1. Identify the market-conduct and ethical violations in Delia's ad, gift-card program, replacement, and lead-generation practices. Prioritize the most serious.
Read the worked answer
The gift-card program is the clearest rebating risk. A $50 inducement for a referral that results in a sale is a valuable consideration not stated in the policy. Unless the policy or a specific statute permits it, rebating is prohibited because it gives one buyer an advantage not available to all. The ad is also problematic: 'state-approved' implies regulatory endorsement of product superiority, which is misleading, and 'highest guaranteed payout' is an unsubstantiated superlative. The bar chart may be misleading if it compares unlike products, ignores fees, or hides the 10-year surrender period. The replacement is the most serious suitability issue. Replacing a 72-year-old's annuity, incurring a $9,800 surrender charge and extending the surrender period from 5 to 10 years, requires a documented comparison and a reasonable basis to believe the client benefits. The signed form alone does not prove disclosure. The lead vendor's texts without do-not-call screening create telemarketing and privacy exposure. Priority: stop the replacement practice and gift-card program, preserve records, review all 14 referrals, and correct the advertising.
2. What replacement and disclosure steps should have been taken for the 72-year-old client, and what remedy is appropriate now?
Read the worked answer
Before submitting the replacement, Delia should have provided a written replacement notice, obtained a signed statement, and given a side-by-side comparison of the existing and proposed contracts. The comparison should show the $9,800 surrender charge, the old 5-year surrender period versus the new 10-year period, death benefit, fees, crediting method, guarantees, and liquidity. She should have documented the client's goals, income needs, time horizon, and risk tolerance, and confirmed that a 10-year commitment was suitable for a 72-year-old. The insurer also has a duty to review the replacement form and may reject an incomplete one. If the client did not receive the comparison, the appropriate remedy is to unwind the replacement if the old contract can be restored, or to make the client whole for the surrender charge and any lost benefits. The agency should not simply refund the gift card; it should correct the suitability failure in writing, offer rescission, and document the client's choice.
3. What corrective actions and written communication should the agency undertake with the client and regulator?
Read the worked answer
The agency should send the client a plain-language letter acknowledging the complaint, summarizing what happened, and offering a concrete remedy: rescind the new annuity and restore the old one if the carrier permits, or reimburse the $9,800 surrender charge and any tax cost caused by the replacement. The letter should give a direct contact, a response deadline, and a copy of the replacement comparison that should have been provided. Internally, the agency should suspend the gift-card program, pull the ad, audit all 14 referral files, review the lead vendor's do-not-call process, and train staff on rebating, replacement, and advertising rules. It should keep a complaint log and cooperate with the market-conduct examiner. If self-reporting is required, the agency should disclose the rebating and replacement issues rather than wait for an examination. Do not admit legal liability before the review is complete, but do not delay the client remedy while investigating.