Jerry Keating

  • This statement is only the tip of the problem.
    • There are hundred and hundreds more.
    • And, Senator Metzenbaum, I would like to tell you, sir, if you do not get the Government to do something about this, you haven't seen nothing yet.  (p18)

--  Jerry Keating, Agent - John Hancock

1993 0525 - GOV (Senate) - When Will Policyholders Be Given The Truth About Life Insurance?, Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH)  ---  [BonkNote]

  • (p15) - Jerry Keating, Agent - I began my career with John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co. in 1965.
    • From 1982 to June 12, 1990, I was the staff manager in the Sioux City, LA, office.
    • My job during this period was to office train and field train new and veteran agents.
  • (p15) - Mr. Keating: I am still employed by the John Hancock ...
    • I would like to know exactly, what guarantees do I have from this committee that I will not be harassed?
  • (p15) - Senator Metzenbaum. We cannot guarantee any position.
    • But I would guess that my colleague here from South Carolina and this Senator and I think every member of this Senate would be so outraged at John Hancock if they took any action against you for testifying before a Senate committee that they would find our wrath unlimited and that we would take every step possible to protect your position.
    • I think the Senator from South Carolina, with whom I disagree on some issues, but I think he would agree that no witness ought to ever be penalized for appearing before a Senate committee.
      • And this gentleman is asking whether or not—what guarantee does he have that he will not be terminated from his employment just by reason of his appearing here. Do I reflect the Senator's view as well?
  • (p15) - Senator Thurmond. Yes, you do.
  • (p15) - Senator Metzenbaum. Thank you. Mr. Keating, please proceed.
  • (p16) - Mr. Keating: I began my career with John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co.in 1965.
    • From 1982 to June 12, 1990, I was the staff manager in the Sioux City, LA, office.
    • During the first years of my employment, everything that I heard from the John Hancock home office turned out to be true, correct, just like we were told.
  • Sometime in the early 1980's, we began selling a product called variable life insurance.
    • Every day we received information on the home office computer with glowing account facts on how much these accounts were earning—25, 30, and 35 percent interest.
    • This information was shown to new prospects to get them to buy variable life insurance.
    • Also, these contracts required no premiums after 5 years.
    • We sold these variable life policies by the hundreds.
    • In fact, our Sioux City office was one of the leaders in the company.
  • (p17) - Several times the other people in our office and I went to meetings where we were told nothing about the risks involved in buying this product, just how much the insured would make.
  • I personally wrote two VLI contracts on Ivan Ammar in Randolf, NE.
    • He is the minister at the Lutheran Church there.
      • He bought these policies for his retirement.
    • The computer sheets showing the amount of his retirement benefits were fantastic.
    • He paid for years, but had to drop his policies when he found out he would have to continue paying premiums after retirement.
  • ...another. Jeanette Keating, my wife, another. Holly Keating, my daughter, another. Jerry Eike, my son-in-law, another. Terry Eike, my daughter, another. Larry Eike, Jerry's brother, another.
  • (p18) - The training we received was sales training only.
    • The home office people who came to the Sioux City, lA, office said: Don't try to become a Ph.D. in variable life insurance; just learn enough to sell it and go.
    • This is what they told the whole office, and this was how I trained any new men that I hired:
      • Just sell it; do not worry about it.
    • Just before I got sick in 1990, the company seemed to change.
      • They started telling us about the risks.
  • This statement is only the tip of the problem.
    • There are hundred and hundreds more.
    • And, Senator Metzenbaum, I would like to tell you, sir, if you do not get the Government to do something about this, you haven't seen nothing yet. 
  • The scheme deceptively called "pension maximization" is stripping unknown thousands of widows of their future security. Its sales appeal arises from the two ways that pensions may be paid. Retirees can choose a larger monthly check that stops when they die--or they can take a smaller check that's paid for as long as the spouse lives, too.
  • Here's the life-insurance angle. The husband, say, is encouraged to buy a policy at retirement or sometime before. He (hen takes the larger pension check. If he dies before his spouse, his pension is replaced by the life-insurance proceeds.
  • In practice, however, this scheme rarely works, says a repentant Jerry Keating of McCook Lake, S.D., once a manager for John Hancock Mutual Life. One of the clients in his office bought into pension max, he says, with a policy meant to be paid up when the man retired. Instead, the client got socked with payments he couldn't afford and the coverage lapsed. The couple sued and John Hancock settled on terms that included a gag rule for both par-ties.
    • An angry Keating says, "The agents didn't know the risks and the company didn't tell us."
  • Almost every pension-max plan I've seen has been deceptive in some way. Unless you feel sure that your spouse will die first or won't need extra money, take the pension that covers you both.

1994 0206 - Newsweek - Here They Go Again, by Jane Bryant Quinn - [link]