Areivim USA - Coronavirus

[ExGingi]

Fascinating story

But
1. He lied about financials, not medical stuff
2. This is almost like the slayer rule... שלא יהא חוטא נשכר

1. Which is what @Yosel stated

yes, it’s a full investigation, not only medical

Contestability means they get to question everything on the application.

2. There's also a 2 year suicide exclusion clause. It doesn't seem like that was what was invoked.

What I find most bizarre about this story (FTR, I actually attended a motivational talk of his once, and IIRC even spoke to him one-on-one) is that this guy lived and breathed the life insurance business.

[AsherO]

2. There's also a 2 year suicide exclusion clause. It doesn't seem like that was what was invoked.

Does that 2-year clock also reset when a policy lapses?

[yos9694]

It's less than 2 years in some states. For example, Colorado contestibility is limited to 1 year. What does it have to do with Areivim though? Life insurance is regulated, not areivim

[yos9694]

Even if the person was murdered or died in an accident or other cause of death that is likely unrelated to anything medical?

Having worked on rescissions, I can assure you that death in the contestibility period is not usually going to disqualify a claim. Rescissions are uncommon except in cases of potential fraud, and it takes effort for the company to demonstrate sufficient grounds. Suicide can be considered potential fraud because the insured might have been contemplating suicide prior to applying for insurance.

An early death will be investigated, and any mistakes or omissions found will be corrected in the premium amount. But honest mistakes are not going to disqualify anyone.

[ExGingi]

Having worked on rescissions, I can assure you that death in the contestibility period is not usually going to disqualify a claim. Rescissions are uncommon except in cases of potential fraud, and it takes effort for the company to demonstrate sufficient grounds. Suicide can be considered potential fraud because the insured might have been contemplating suicide prior to applying for insurance.

An early death will be investigated, and any mistakes or omissions found will be corrected in the premium amount. But honest mistakes are not going to disqualify anyone.

Doesn't proving fraud require showing intent, which is a high bar to cross when the person who's intent is being argued isn't around to question?

I was involved with an Israeli death claim which the insurance company initially denied claiming intent to defraud (there the contestability period is 3 years). A one page letter I wrote to the insurance company asking them to pay unless they have sufficient evidence to show the intent of the deceased had the claim paid promptly.

[ExGingi]

It's less than 2 years in some states. For example, Colorado contestibility is limited to 1 year. What does it have to do with Areivim though? Life insurance is regulated, not areivim

I stand corrected.

Which other states have it shorter than 2 years?

[yos9694]

I stand corrected.

Which other states have it shorter than 2 years?

CO is the only one I can think of but in some states (like CA) the regulators pretend its 0 years.

Doesn't proving fraud require showing intent, which is a high bar to cross when the person who's intent is being argued isn't around to question?

I was involved with an Israeli death claim which the insurance company initially denied claiming intent to defraud (there the contestability period is 3 years). A one page letter I wrote to the insurance company asking them to pay unless they have sufficient evidence to show the intent of the deceased had the claim paid promptly.

Yes its a very high bar and sadly many cases that are obvious fraud slip through either because it is too difficult or too expensive to convince a court

[YitzyS]

I'm getting really perturbed by where this thread is heading. It is almost like a game of Wack-a-mole, where we are trying to pop up new problems as the previous ones are resolved, and even pushing up the same claims that were dealt with 15 pages up. For what Areivim is meant to be, they do a great job, and I find it appalling that members seem to be holding them to a standard that is completely unreasonable, while they fail to ask the same questions about EVERY other tzedakah organization.

"Oh, that's Areivim's side of the story, I think the family may have a different story to tell."

Oh, really?? Yes, I'm sure that's possible. But basic common sense would dictate that the family has a lot more to lose here than a group of rabbonim and directors, and to publicly force them to prove themselves to you seems like people are having some real glee in trying to bash a tzedakah organization and drive potential donors away.

Let me reiterate just a few points from the beginning of the thread, which I think should lay to rest 95 percent of the claims being regurgitated here.

The premise is very smart. Instead of making flashy campaigns when someone dies, there is a donor list that will each give $7 per orphan. As a plus, you have that protection.

I see it as a tzedakah opportunity. The self-protection is only a bonus.

Exactly, if you are willing to support unmarried orphans & even an almana sometimes when there are many kids left at home then this is a no brainer.

People that are using this for life insurance should please get off!
This is a pure charity!

"Areivim USA is not life insurance. Areivim USA has been established
primarily as a charitable endeavor and its halachic status is like that of all
tzedakah money collected from the public. In the event of a the passing of a
member r”l, all contributions can be made with maaser money"

It's worked beautifully for so many years, paying out millions to orphans.

Also, many many people see this as an amazing charity. Thus, even if they would shut down today, it would have been a resounding success. Remember, the end goal here for so many is not to get paid out by them. That possibility is only a side benefit.

For anyone complaining about the organization - unless you have hard facts that you verified - resist the urge and just browse Yeshiva World instead. Complaints, even in a gentle tone, can have consequences by convincing people against signing up for a great tzedakah opportunity. Posts here have a real impact, as is evident by this:

+1
But I just signed up because of @YitzyS and @Chapshnell. Tizku L'mitzvos

just signed up as well, thanks for the encouragement

Please note that every post quoted here is from the first 4 pages of this thread (in default settings). There's no need for a merry-go-round of unverified claims.

/rant

[ExGingi]

CO is the only one I can think of but in some states (like CA) the regulators pretend its 0 years.

Yes its a very high bar and sadly many cases that are obvious fraud slip through either because it is too difficult or too expensive to convince a court

I recall once reading a FL case where the court denied the insurance company claim for recission saying that the law has a Fraud exclusion after 2 years, but doesn't have an imposter exclusion (the insurance company claimed that an imposter took the medical exam, which seemed very plausible based on the individual's recorded medical condition at the time of application).

[ExGingi]

I'm getting really perturbed by where this thread is heading. It is almost like a game of Wack-a-mole, where we are trying to pop up new problems as the previous ones are resolved, and even pushing up the same claims that were dealt with 15 pages up. For what Areivim is meant to be, they do a great job, and I find it appalling that members seem to be holding them to a standard that is completely unreasonable, while they fail to ask the same questions about EVERY other tzedakah organization.

"Oh, that's Areivim's side of the story, I think the family may have a different story to tell."

Oh, really?? Yes, I'm sure that's possible. But basic common sense would dictate that the family has a lot more to lose here than a group of rabbonim and directors, and to publicly force them to prove themselves to you seems like people are having some real glee in trying to bash a tzedakah organization and drive potential donors away.

Let me reiterate just a few points from the beginning of the thread, which I think should lay to rest 95 percent of the claims being regurgitated here.

For anyone complaining about the organization - unless you have hard facts that you verified - resist the urge and just browse Yeshiva World instead. Complaints, even in a gentle tone, can have consequences by convincing people against signing up for a great tzedakah opportunity. Posts here have a real impact, as is evident by this:
Please note that every post quoted here is from the first 4 pages of this thread (in default settings). There's no need for a merry-go-round of unverified claims.

/rant

Wiki updated for simplicity and clarity.

[AsherO]

I'm getting really perturbed by where this thread is heading. It is almost like a game of Wack-a-mole, where we are trying to pop up new problems as the previous ones are resolved, and even pushing up the same claims that were dealt with 15 pages up. For what Areivim is meant to be, they do a great job, and I find it appalling that members seem to be holding them to a standard that is completely unreasonable, while they fail to ask the same questions about EVERY other tzedakah organization.

"Oh, that's Areivim's side of the story, I think the family may have a different story to tell."

Oh, really?? Yes, I'm sure that's possible. But basic common sense would dictate that the family has a lot more to lose here than a group of rabbonim and directors, and to publicly force them to prove themselves to you seems like people are having some real glee in trying to bash a tzedakah organization and drive potential donors away.

Let me reiterate just a few points from the beginning of the thread, which I think should lay to rest 95 percent of the claims being regurgitated here.

For anyone complaining about the organization - unless you have hard facts that you verified - resist the urge and just browse Yeshiva World instead. Complaints, even in a gentle tone, can have consequences by convincing people against signing up for a great tzedakah opportunity. Posts here have a real impact, as is evident by this:
Please note that every post quoted here is from the first 4 pages of this thread (in default settings). There's no need for a merry-go-round of unverified claims.

/rant

What other charity organization only gives money to their donors?

If their sole purpose is charity then widows and orphans of someone they’re claiming wasn’t honest in their application or didn’t qualify shouldn’t be treated any differently than anyone else, their needs are the same.

If you can’t point me to where my questions about sustainability and transparency are addressed I’ll stop asking those questions.

[ExGingi]

What other charity organization only gives money to their donors?

I can think of some that only give to a certain subset of their donors (various Keren Chassanim) or other communal charities where people pay קהל געלט.

[YitzyS]

sustainability

Anything that has variable factors cannot be guaranteed sustainable, but it's lasted this long, and as my quoted post says earlier, "even if they would shut down today, it would have been a resounding success."

transparency

"ask the same questions about EVERY other tzedakah organization."

[aygart]

What other charity organization only gives money to their donors?

If their sole purpose is charity then widows and orphans of someone they’re claiming wasn’t honest in their application or didn’t qualify shouldn’t be treated any differently than anyone else, their needs are the same.

If you can’t point me to where my questions about sustainability and transparency are addressed I’ll stop asking those questions.

by only giving to members they keep it dignified

[Yosel]

I b personally don’t mind giving tzdaka to a family in need, in the case of areivim $7 per child after parent passes away. And the money really goes to the almana in cash.
Why would they need/have a pre existing clause???
עס איז דאך צדקה!!

[aygart]

Why would they need/have a pre existing clause???

to keep it sustainable

[YitzyS]

I b personally don’t mind giving tzdaka to a family in need, in the case of areivim $7 per child after parent passes away. And the money really goes to the almana in cash.
Why would they need/have a pre existing clause???
עס איז דאך צדקה!!

Because it would not be sustainable at all. You would never get a pool of thousands of non-gevirim to afford paying out $7 for every yasom worldwide. It would not work. Instead, there is a framework, JUST LIKE EVERY TZEDAKAH, which they address.

Your question is almost like asking, "If RCCS cares about helping Jews, why don't they help poor Jews pay their mortgage?"

[aygart]

Because it would not be sustainable at all. You would never get a pool of thousands of non-gevirim to afford paying out $7 for every yasom worldwide. It would not work. Instead, there is a framework, JUST LIKE EVERY TZEDAKAH, which they address.

Your question is almost like asking, "If RCCS cares about helping Jews, why don't they help poor Jews pay their mortgage?"

any tzedaka that wants to remain viable needs to have some guidelines. on the other hand, this would still be limited to members and it would only be a question of adverse selection.

[JACKBLUE]

I b personally don’t mind giving tzdaka to a family in need, in the case of areivim $7 per child after parent passes away. And the money really goes to the almana in cash.
Why would they need/have a pre existing clause???
עס איז דאך צדקה!!

Just because you should have what to bash about 

[Yosel]

Your question is almost like asking, "If RCCS cares about helping Jews, why don't they help poor Jews pay their mortgage?"

טענו לו בחיטים והודו לזכר קדשו