Comparing quotes across carriers is common. But when one applicant has more than a dozen applications pending across multiple companies, applies for several different face amounts, and has a long history of lapsing policies, that behavior is cause for concern and calls for a closer look.
In October of 2026, a 43-year-old male applied to an MIB member company for $1M in Term Life coverage.
The Total Line Alert on this case reveals an overwhelming volume of activity:
- 14 Pending applications over the last 6 months
- Across 10 additional carriers
- Face amounts ranging from $75K up to $1M
- Largely Term Life
- 18 terminated cases since 2014
- Across another 10 additional carriers
- Face amounts ranging from $28K to $1.5M
- 6 Not Taken
- 8 terminated within 12 months of issue
- 2 policies placed in force in the last 4 months for $100K and $500K
Take a look at the Total Line Alert below to see how the data reflects this concerning behavior. (You can also view an expandable version of this Total Line Alert):
The alert surfaces numerous red flags which raise several serious questions:
- Can this applicant financially justify and afford $8.6M?
- Could the wide range of face amounts indicate an attempt to avoid financial underwriting requirements and secure more coverage than is justified?
- Might the wide range of face amounts also point to an attempt to avoid requirements by stacking policies?
- With 6 policies not taken, was this person shopping carriers to compare requirements and steer clear of any that would be unfavorable to his quote?
- Could there be an agent involved that is helping this applicant dodge requirements?
- There is a $1.5M policy placed 8/2/2022 and lapsed 9/2/2023 with a new policy of the same face placed with a different carrier 9/20/2023 which then lapsed 10/20/2024. Could this be churning?
- In several instances, multiple policies were issued or applications were pending within the same carrier. Could legacy systems be hiding this activity from underwriters in different teams or divisions of that company?
We consulted with some members involved in this case and learned that in fact this applicant has health issues of underwriting significance, has also had multiple bankruptcies, and failed to complete their interview for at least one applied for policy.
At least 20 MIB member companies were involved, and there may be more! If your company has yet to contribute data to the In Force Data Vault, could you be company 21? Without a Total Line Alerts subscription, how would you know?
MIB Total Line Service gives your underwriters visibility into an applicant's total coverage exposure, including pending applications, terminated cases, and policies in force across carriers, so you aren't left absorbing risk you never knew existed. Learn more: https://www.mibgroup.com/solutions/total-line-service/