- Report: #1423430
Complaint Review: LifeTel Financial & insurance services - Ontario California
Reported By:
Norm -
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
Submitted:
Updated:
-
Author Not Confirmed
Why?
LifeTel Financial & insurance services
3281 E Guasti Rd Ontario, 91761 California, United States
Phone:
(888) 898-7334
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
LifeTel Financial & insurance services Owners: Jim Hendry Elly Weatherby $300.00 payed to get leads and never delivered.Also asked for a refund of 300.00 was promised if I could not get my insurance license. No responce. Ontario California
Hi,
After I thought careful research from this forum, Better Business Bureau and Rip Off Report that this company and this opportunity looked real.I am to lazy to go through the entire timeline with these crooks but here is a quick overview. I first talked to them back in November of last year. Had a phone interview etc. The 600.00 part of the conversation also came up. After our talk he said all looked good and would be happy to have me on board. He said he could break down the $600.00 into 2 payments of 300.00 each.At this point I payed the $300.00. So I was then sent over some pdf files to go over the scripts I told them that I had reviewed them and was ready to go. So they said we will send you over your first set of leads, which I never received. So really here is the interesting part. I had let all my licenses go and because I did not notify this state (Oregon) that I was going to be here more than 30 days.
So with that I called the dept of Insurance and girl said if you retake the exam licensing school fingerprints etc she felt there would be no problem getting my license back. But not knowing everything for sure on getting my license back I had specifically asked Jim Hendry if there should be a problem getting my license back what would happen with the $300.00. He said if there was a problem he would refund the money as he stated "You not being licensed would do neither of us any good" So as it ends up I passed all requirements to get my license back, but that I was going to be fined 500.00 for not reporting address change.I then contacted Jim about this and he did not get back to me for the longest time. I emailed him that with the outlay of license school etc and now with the fine that I could use the 300.00 towards the fine and reset with them later.Now my last email from him did say if I could not get my license he would refund the money, but I think misunderstood that the fine does prevent me from getting my license.
I attached the letter from the financial enforcement officer as well. he said he would have to get with his business partners and get back to me. That was Jan 8th and he said get back to me by the next Tuesday which has been a little over a week ago.and have not heard back.
And so with all of this long winded email I hope this helps as the old saying goes "buyer be aware"
Just to recap:
Company is: LifeTel Financial and Insurance Services.
Principles: Jim Hendry
Elly Weatherby
2 Updates & Rebuttals
Bert
Portland,United States
Life Insurance Practices and Oversight
#2Consumer Suggestion
Fri, February 09, 2018
By the way, the saying is a maxim. It is, "Buyer beware" and not "Buyer Be aware".
Licensing is one's own problem to solve. These firms just try to help so they can appoint new agents and gain more business. It's pretty usual. This person does not sound very informed and one wonders how much business he has written, if any.
I don't work for this company. Maybe I might at some point though.
Just a comment to all of this: many people are not aware that there is quite a lot of training and certification in this field. What is often done is to find a way to bring someone on board as an agent so that the newcomer is not paying a huge training expense out of pocket and up front.
There are some ways that Insurance firms have approached this to pay for the new agent and then reimburse from their commissions, etc. But there is strict oversight in every state with the Insurance and Financial industries and this is not some, "work from home" type of thing. Certification in Oregon, for example, requires about 80 hours of study and then pay for a state examination in order to become a "Producer", which most people do not have a correct definition for in the Insurance field.
I understand that there are scams but if a person actually looks at the certifications and so forth, it is easy to establish the verity of the Insurance company or issuer. People familiar with Insurance will understand what a Field Underwriter is, for instance. Others will try to guess.
It is incumbent on the person applying into the field to do their due diligence and that means more than just a Google search. These people who complain probably do not really understand and have not realized this is an actual Profession.
Elly
Ontario,United States
Inaccurate Report & Information Provided/Filed
#3REBUTTAL Owner of company
Wed, January 17, 2018
My name is Elly Weatherby, I am the President of LifeTel Financial & Insurance Services and I am replying on behalf of our company to this report. So it is clearly stated at the onset, to the best of my knowledge and understanding, I am not currently aware of an agent in Oregon (referenced in the report) having brought this particular matter to my direct attention, nor can I say from the report information itself that I’m aware of who has filed the report. Simply from the information contained in the report itself, I’ll do my best to address each claim.
First, I noted from the report that the report filer mentioned a gesture that we sometimes, not often, extend to certain individuals where we allow them to split their program cost into 2 payments. This filer has stated this was the case with him/her and that he/she has paid the first of those 2 payments, roughly $300. Having only paid the half portion of the program cost, we would clearly not release leads to any individual, until the second and final payment had been received.
Also, if this filer’s statement is true, regarding his/her insurance license, and of course I have no reason to doubt him/her, as it clearly seems to be the basis of the report, we would also not release leads to any individual, unless they held a current, active resident insurance license in the state(s) leads were to be delivered. There would be a final check done in our lead department, as would have certainly been the case in this situation, and leads would be held from delivery until the license status was confirmed. So, once again, it would appear we simply just followed our usual procedure here.
Next, this filer reports that his/her issue stems from a licensing matter with his/her resident state. It is true that our policy has always been to refund the program cost, in the event that the individual was ineligible to become licensed based on the guidelines and/or determination of his/her resident state, but, by his/her own admission, that isn’t the case here. Per the filer’s statements, he/she was licensed in the state prior and, as also confirmed with his/her state’s insurance department, he/she can become licensed once again. However, based entirely on his/her own state’s guidelines, he/she violated some stipulation of his/her state’s insurance code and is therefore required to pay a fine for his/her license to be reissued/reinstated. Clearly, that is absolutely not the same as being ineligible to become state licensed again.
Finally, as also stated in the report, the filer also says that my associate I believe mentioned some sort of contact by a “following Tuesday” which by this filer’s own timeline happens to be today. I would simply point out that yesterday was a federal holiday and today, this Tuesday, is our first official business day of this week, as it is for several businesses. Having said that, no day, date or timeline would change the points I’ve raised in this response in any way. Had this report filer contacted me directly regarding this matter, and I stress again that to date he/she has not, this would still be my response. As I’ve said, a matter pertaining to a fine with his/her state that clearly we have absolutely nothing in any way, shape or form to do with, didn’t mandate and will see absolutely no portion of clearly doesn’t change our company policy whatsoever.
Thank you sincerely for your review and consideration of my comments.
