A relative took out a life insurance policy years ago and listed "unnamed children" as the beneficiary. At the time, they had several children but later had another. The relative died recently and the family went to make the insurance claim.So who is included in this? I'm not familiar with how this works.Seems to me that it should be all of the children: those born before and after the policy was taken out. If the relative had wanted only the first set of children then they would have been specifically named on the policy. I suspect they wanted to allow for the possibility that they may have more children (even tho' they were in their 40's) and did have another.I will x-post to the Estate Planning board.
To my mind, "unnamed children" is a VERY loose, overly broad, description, just begging for interpretation issues. There is some limiting wording that can, somewhat, better describe what the policyholder intended, like:Unnamed children born of the Insured.Unnamed children born of a particular marriage.Unnamed children, including legally adopted children...And my, personal, favorite - Unnamed children born to NoIDAtAll. ~ ~
Unnamed children born of the Insured.I think that's how it read. What I could find on the web is that this is used somewhat for convenience, so one doesn't have to keep changing the policy as more children are added (by birth or adoption). It reduces the risk of forgetting to add a child in a timely manner and the insured dying before the change can be made. It does add the possibility that unknown children can come out of the woodwork. :O
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra