Suit Sightings #4: Overpaid Premiums, Underpaid Claims

Our latest installment of Suit Sightings was written by my teammate, Phil Rahling.  I asked for the chance to introduce Phil’s write-up, and am doing so for two reasons.

First, this is an important piece.  The story told in the complaint about which Phil has written is, to be frank, a reminder to everyone who knows and serves the insurance industry of why we so often have such an uphill battle before juries and otherwise in the public eye.

Second, I wanted the chance through this message to thank Phil publicly for the tremendous contribution he has made here in the approximately year and a half we’ve been together.  Phil is headed off to greener pastures–to get an M.B.A.–late this summer.  Please join me in wishing him well.

_______________________________________________________________________

A recent lawsuit filed in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court, Maryland, paints a troubling picture: the Estate of the insured, along with the Estate’s beneficiaries, are suing Shenandoah Life Insurance Company for allegedly shortchanging them on three whole life insurance policies worth approximately $40,000. According to the complaint, Shenandoah failed to pay out the full accumulated value of the policies, including dividends and interest, and continued collecting premiums long after the policies were fully funded.

The complaint alleges that the plaintiff faithfully paid premiums for decades on three policies, totaling over $17,000 in contributions. Each policy promised, according to the complaint, a 2.5% compounded annual interest rate on accumulated dividends and a matured endowment payout when the cash value equaled the face amount. Yet, Shenandoah allegedly kept invoicing the plaintiff for premiums decades after the policies were fully funded and never paid the endowment. When the plaintiff passed away in May 2023, the beneficiaries received checks for just over $5,000 per policy—less than the premiums paid and far below the expected value of over $14,000–$16,000 per policy. The plaintiffs also claim Shenandoah stonewalled their requests for a full accounting of dividends, cash value, and calculations.

The lawsuit contains a slew of allegations: violations of Maryland Insurance Code §16-206 for failing to honor dividend interest terms, unfair claim settlement practices under §27-304, fraudulent insurance acts under §27-401, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. For industry pros, this case is a stark reminder to ensure policies are managed transparently, payouts reflect contractual obligations, and accounting requests are handled promptly. Dropping the ball on any of these can erode trust and invite legal scrutiny.

What raises eyebrows is this: why didn’t Shenandoah promptly provide a detailed breakdown of the policies’ values or honor the full payout, including the promised interest? One would think meeting the policy’s clear terms from the outset would be far less risky than grappling with a lawsuit demanding hefty damages and legal fees. If premiums were indeed collected after the policies were fully funded, shouldn’t those funds be returned to prevent claims of unjust enrichment? It’s tough to see how a combination of stonewalling and litigation is smarter.

Keep an eye on this case as it unfolds—it’s a critical reminder to scrutinize your systems for monitoring policy cash values, handling dividends, and delivering accurate payouts. Mistakes are inevitable, but proactive measures and tight procedures can prevent small oversights from snowballing into costly disputes.

As always, we take no position—and never would—on whether the allegations in the complaint have merit. If you’d like a copy of the complaint, we’d be happy to provide it upon request.