Death Insurance

[asd345]

I have an idea and would like to hear your opinions:

People get less kids and acquire wealth they take to the grave, or even have something like nice house but not the money they need to live a life nice with. There should be a way of selling stuff while you live for the time after you die, but still be able to use it as long as you are alive.

The death insurance could let people sell things and get the price as a sort of salary in advance. Take the house: Sell it when you are 60. You can still use it as long as you live or up to a fixed time. Meanwhile you get a monthly share of the houses price as a sort of salary. The owner and the buyer can agree individually if its a fixed loan, if the price gets paid in full at the beginning or in parts, or a professional employee of the company could estimate the value and salary as insurance consultants usually do.

Naturally the house would be sold cheaper than what its worth. The business model is the same as insurances have but in reverse.

They get money to protect people from ills which in the end do not cost as much as the client contribution. It might work as an investment model as well, were people buy the house together and sell it afterwards. Next to houses all other items were of interest which do not deteriorate much over time.

The part of the company would be:

1) Create a platform were users find each other
2) Fix the contract legally at a notary (usage right for the old owner)

Thanks for all replies!

[Harold Mansfield]

Take the house: Sell it when you are 60. You can still use it as long as you live or up to a fixed time. Meanwhile you get a monthly share of the houses price as a sort of salary. The owner and the buyer can agree individually if its a fixed loan, if the price gets paid in full at the beginning or in parts, or a professional employee of the company could estimate the value and salary as insurance consultants usually do.

Naturally the house would be sold cheaper than what its worth. The business model is the same as insurances have but in reverse.

They get money to protect people from ills which in the end do not cost as much as the client contribution. It might work as an investment model as well, were people buy the house together and sell it afterwards.

Isn't this what a reverse mortgage does?

And you'll never get anyone to buy something named "Death Insurance". That's why life insurance is called "Life Insurance". Because technically it doesn't insure you while you are living. It only pays off when you die. But if they called it "Death Insurance" no one would by it. People don't like being reminded of their own mortality.

[asd345]

Hey,

of course, the name wasnt serious.

Yes, its close to that, but only that the actors can both be private persons or other companies. Similarly to loans now not only being given by banks but by loan clubs and the like.

So, how about it now?

[Harold Mansfield]

Hey,

of course, the name wasnt serious.

Yes, its close to that, but only that the actors can both be private persons or other companies. Similarly to loans now not only being given by banks but by loan clubs and the like.

So, how about it now?
If it's not regulated (which insurance is) it's a recipee for disaster, and fraud. All you need to do is look at recent history. The Old Savings and Loan Industry (Keating 5) . Unregistered Investment Funds (Madoff) . Lack of regulation and oversight in the Mortgage Industry (The Great Recession). Our history is riddled with examples of unregulated financial schemes that screwed people over and collapsed the economy.

History has proven time and time again, that there is a certain element in society that cannot be trusted with other people's money. And insurance schemes are as old as America itself.

That's my opnion.

If you just want to create an investment club, go for it. But if you do anything with insurance, mortgages or any other finacial transactions, it has to fall under the regulated guidleines.

I'm not trying to beat your idea down, I'm just bringing up a few things that you may not have thought about.

[asd345]

Hey,

thanks, im taking this a productive criticism.

Your right about the regulation, but I think it could be setteld when dealing with the company. If the implementations for society would be good I dont know, as I dont know for any commercial enterprise.

But given you have a regulation in form of a contract it should be possible for both parties to benefit: The owner who gets money while living and the - lets say - investment club which is going to get his house (or whatever) under value after he passed on. For an investment club profit of course would come only after selling the unit.

[Harold Mansfield]

Hey,

thanks, im taking this a productive criticism.

Your right about the regulation, but I think it could be setteld when dealing with the company. If the implementations for society would be good I dont know, as I dont know for any commercial enterprise.

But given you have a regulation in form of a contract it should be possible for both parties to benefit: The owner who gets money while living and the - lets say - investment club which is going to get his house (or whatever) under value after he passed on. For an investment club profit of course would come only after selling the unit.

The contract isn't the regulation. There are specific guidelines set up by the Feds to protect consumers that you have to abide by to be licensed to provide financial services. Trying to register it as a "consulting" firm is not good enough anymore. When you deal with people's money, especially in insurance and mortgages, you have to follow the rules that are set up for that.

What you are describing, exists, or at least has existed for years. Private investors pooling money to mitigate risk and share in the profits is what Bain Capitol was built on and others like it. So I can see where you are coming from, I just think it needs a lot of fine tuning and knowledge of how to make it legal.

[nealrm]

No manner what term you use to call this, it is a reverse mortgage. As such it will fall under federal regulations.

Just so you know, reverse mortgages are getting a bad rep and are generally on the way out. The area is ripe with fraud and the rates are generally poor. In addition you can get the same benefits from a traditional home loan.

Sorry, I don't want to rain on your parade, but you are about 10 years late on this idea.

[huggytree]

what if the owner trashes his house....or whatever property he is getting a loan for?

i vote that the owner lives within his means and leave's his house and wealth to his kids....just like his parents and grand parents did for him

a reverse mortgage already exists...i dont see any need for anything else

[asd345]

ok, thats pretty clear as well, thanks!

[billbenson]

what if the owner trashes his house....or whatever property he is getting a loan for?

i vote that the owner lives within his means and leave's his house and wealth to his kids....just like his parents and grand parents did for him

a reverse mortgage already exists...i dont see any need for anything else

And if they don't have kids? It sounds like the OP would like to have 0 wealth when they die and is looking for a way to time that. Reverse mortgages don't do that.