What Minnesota’s Revised Suicide Exclusions Statute Means for Insurers


What You Must Know

  • The Minnesota replace will take impact in only a few months.
  • Many insurers had been utilizing a two-year exclusion interval.
  • Now, the utmost exclusion interval is one yr.

Whereas the life insurance coverage coverage suicide exclusion shouldn’t be a simple topic, most life insurance coverage business professionals are very conversant in these provisions.

The provisions bar beneficiaries from receiving cost on dying claims when the insured occasion dies on account of suicide.

Nonetheless, a latest change to Minnesota Statute Part 60A.031, which spells out the insurance-relevant provisions within the “land of 10,000 lakes,” imposes new necessities on life insurers who subject insurance policies containing such a provision.

This statutory modification is prone to be considered one of many adjustments for the business to watch as America’s rising acceptance of psychological well being points and the following familial pressure seep into new laws and court docket choices.

The statute takes impact quickly.

First, some context. Minnesota Statute 60 was enacted in 1967, and its arrival coincided with the creation of the state’s Human Rights Division.

The follow-on Part 61A pertains particularly to life insurance coverage insurance policies.

The present model of Part 61A.031 states partly that for functions of a suicide exclusion, “the sanity or madness of an individual shall not be a consider figuring out whether or not an individual dedicated suicide,” however the provision incorporates no limitation on the size of the exclusionary interval.

This previous summer time, lawmakers amended Part 31 of Minnesota Statute Part 61A with this new language:

“A life insurance coverage coverage or certificates issued or delivered on this state could exclude or prohibit legal responsibility for any dying profit within the occasion the insured dies on account of suicide inside one yr from the date of the difficulty of the coverage or certificates. Any exclusion or restriction shall be clearly acknowledged within the coverage or certificates. Any life insurance coverage coverage or certificates which incorporates any exclusion or restriction beneath this paragraph shall additionally present that within the occasion any dying profit is denied as a result of the insured dies due to suicide inside one yr from the date of subject of the coverage or certificates, the insurer shall refund all premiums paid for protection offering the denied dying profit on the insured.”

The revised statute (in addition to the statute mandating sure notices to policyholders who substitute their insurance coverage, part 61A.60, subdivision 3) takes impact Jan. 1, 2024, and applies to insurance policies issued on or after that date.

Nonetheless, the phrasing of the availability raises the query as as to if an insurer making use of a suicide exclusion is successfully paying a restricted profit within the type of a refund of premiums.

The related language within the act prompts two questions.

1. Has the time interval that many life insurance coverage insurance policies embody in a suicide exclusion provision for a Minnesota policyholder been diminished?

The reply is sure except a coverage already has a one-year restrict on the exclusion.

Previous to the modification, a life insurer issuing a coverage in Minnesota might determine how lengthy the suicide exclusion could be efficient. The exclusion interval was typically two years.

The amended statute limits the time to invoke a suicide exclusion to at least one yr and requires that insurers should refund premiums paid for situations during which the dying profit had been denied.

Whereas the statute is just too new to have been challenged in court docket, its language surrounding the time interval seems to be legally sound and is considerably just like different state statutes.

Curiously, proceedings from the Minnesota Home of Representatives’ dialogue throughout the enactment course of reveal that the preliminary advice was to restrict the time interval to a few months.

A compromise was struck to land on one yr, a time increment according to that now utilized in different states, similar to Colorado and Missouri.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *