The Life Insurance Policies on Dr. Sievers

[Satchie]

I don't find the fact that the Sievires' had life insurance unusual. It becomes part of this case when coupled with the fact that they had financial problems and Teresa was found murdered.

And because MS lied about it!

I was wondering, how much life insurance did he tell CWW he was going to get. I assume they were going to split it in some way. What if he told CWW $2.5 million, and now CWW discovers it was $4.5.

 

[FightTheOstrich]

I haven't had time to look at the discovery. Was the life insurance only on Teresa? None for Mark?

I really can't see MS spending a dime on life insurance for himself. If he cared about his wife's welfare TS would still be alive. Plus he didn't actually contribute financially.

 

[Satchie]

I haven't had time to look at the discovery. Was the life insurance only on Teresa? None for Mark?

Mark told LE that they each had a $2.5 million policy. I doubt that it's been verified.

Actually, that would have been a waste of money, TS was the breadwinner and should have had a larger policy than MS.

 

[FelicityLemon]

The problem is that the insurance companies do not tell if someone has taken out a policy on you (which I think should be changed). If you have a relationship (I.e. Parent, spouse, sibling, etc) then you can usually take out a policy by providing some basic information & then you pay the premiums.

No alert goes out to inform anyone of the policy that's on your head. It's terribly sad because in essence, many then become targets to the criminally insane who view them worth more dead than alive.

Maybe legislature could pass called the TS Law --> no one can take out a policy on your life without your written & verbal consent AND copies of the policy with the payout amount & beneficiary must be mailed certified. Will it stop all murders for payout; probably not. But it would cut down on this sort of crime.

Moo

HOlycrap I had no idea that the insured wasn't informed and I'm shocked! That is wrong wrong wrong and shouldn't be allowed. I certainly would want to know who takes out insurance that if I die, they get a payday. That would be so useful to troubled marriages - well, useful to the one who is a potential victim.

We read so many stories of murders (like this) where we find out afterwards the wife or husband was heavily insured. I don't know if TS was aware of all the policies or just the one. BUT if MS took out the others without her knowledge, but she found out while preparing for divorce it might have been a warning to her. Stories of horrible marriages where I'm pretty sure if the wife knew about the policies, she wouldn't have been as trusting or suppress her own feelings that something isn't right. Similar to MS' comment to LE: "we've been working on the marriage." That's what men have said to wives wanting to leave. Spouse says "let's work on it, don't move out, move back in" then whammo on the unsuspecting victim when her guard is down.

This is just so wrong. We all need and deserve to know who is banking on our deaths.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

HOlycrap I had no idea that the insured wasn't informed and I'm shocked! That is wrong wrong wrong and shouldn't be allowed. I certainly would want to know who takes out insurance that if I die, they get a payday. That would be so useful to troubled marriages - well, useful to the one who is a potential victim.

We read so many stories of murders (like this) where we find out afterwards the wife or husband was heavily insured. I don't know if TS was aware of all the policies or just the one. BUT if MS took out the others without her knowledge, but she found out while preparing for divorce it might have been a warning to her. Stories of horrible marriages where I'm pretty sure if the wife knew about the policies, she wouldn't have been as trusting or suppress her own feelings that something isn't right. Similar to MS' comment to LE: "we've been working on the marriage." That's what men have said to wives wanting to leave. Spouse says "let's work on it, don't move out, move back in" then whammo on the unsuspecting victim when her guard is down.

This is just so wrong. We all need and deserve to know who is banking on our deaths.

Exactly. And another thing....let's say your spouse "Dave" gets a motorcycle & the other spouse "Ann" feels adamant that this puts them in a more precarious position due to higher rates of fatalities on motorcycle collisions. "Dave" says he understands & wants to appease "Ann" so he agrees to take out a $300,000 life insurance policy (enough to cover the mortgage in case of his demise) & names "Ann" as the beneficiary.
"Ann" may feel a bit of comfort but she shouldn't feel too cozy and here's why:

"Dave" could change his beneficiary any time he wants & with no notification going to "Ann". Also, he could cancel the policy the next day & she wouldn't know it.

P.S. No, my name is not "Ann"...lol

 

[Satchie]

HOlycrap I had no idea that the insured wasn't informed

Yes there are safeguards in place to make sure the insured is informed:

http://www.insure.com/life-insurance/secret-policies.html

 

[Webjunkie]

And because MS lied about it!

I was wondering, how much life insurance did he tell CWW he was going to get. I assume they were going to split it in some way. What if he told CWW $2.5 million, and now CWW discovers it was $4.5.

I wondered that too. If MS told LE he had "around" 40k cash, that would be "around" 10% of insurance benefits.

But MS told LE nothing was "missing" from the home after the incident. So maybe MS had around $100k (or a little less, like $90k) in cash at home. MS could have left around $50k in the "envelope" to be picked up by CWW upon entry into the home, and $40k +plus change still there when LE checked the safes.

Also, I wonder why the luggage was rummaged? I wonder if they were looking for TS wedding ring? Perhaps she was not wearing it, and MS told them to take it in the "burglary gone bad". That would have been a nice little pawn shop deal? Maybe a little bonus money? Has anyone found anything about HER ring?

 

[observation]

I wondered that too. If MS told LE he had "around" 40k cash, that would be "around" 10% of insurance benefits.

But MS told LE nothing was "missing" from the home after the incident. So maybe MS had around $100k (or a little less, like $90k) in cash at home. MS could have left around $50k in the "envelope" to be picked up by CWW upon entry into the home, and $40k +plus change still there when LE checked the safes.

Also, I wonder why the luggage was rummaged? I wonder if they were looking for TS wedding ring? Perhaps she was not wearing it, and MS told them to take it in the "burglary gone bad". That would have been a nice little pawn shop deal? Maybe a little bonus money? Has anyone found anything about HER ring?

I believe in the doc dumps it mentions some staging of the crime scene. I took the rummaged through suitcase to possibly be a part of this. JMO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Yes there are safeguards in place to make sure the insured is informed:

http://www.insure.com/life-insurance/secret-policies.html

In theory, a person could take out numerous policies (think cheap term policies) on someone if they have an "insurable interest" up to $100,000 each without requiring verification parameters such as a physical exam or signature. There is no limit to how many policies & no notification is sent to the party.

Heck, it is somewhat common for private companies to take out insurance on its executives---and it doesn't need to be terminated upon an executive's firing.

 

[DesiredJustice]

I don't find the fact that the Sievires' had life insurance unusual. It becomes part of this case when coupled with the fact that they had financial problems and Teresa was found murdered.

Definite motive.

JMO

What I think became "unusual" or suspicious is MS lying about how much life insurance in $$'s and the amount of policies he had on TS. = Motive IMO

 

[DesiredJustice]

HOlycrap I had no idea that the insured wasn't informed and I'm shocked! That is wrong wrong wrong and shouldn't be allowed. I certainly would want to know who takes out insurance that if I die, they get a payday. That would be so useful to troubled marriages - well, useful to the one who is a potential victim.

We read so many stories of murders (like this) where we find out afterwards the wife or husband was heavily insured. I don't know if TS was aware of all the policies or just the one. BUT if MS took out the others without her knowledge, but she found out while preparing for divorce it might have been a warning to her. Stories of horrible marriages where I'm pretty sure if the wife knew about the policies, she wouldn't have been as trusting or suppress her own feelings that something isn't right. Similar to MS' comment to LE: "we've been working on the marriage." That's what men have said to wives wanting to leave. Spouse says "let's work on it, don't move out, move back in" then whammo on the unsuspecting victim when her guard is down.

This is just so wrong. We all need and deserve to know who is banking on our deaths.

I agree! Heck...I get a phone call on land line, cell phone and and email from a credit card company when I've charged more than what my usual habit is.

 

[FightTheOstrich]

What I think became "unusual" or suspicious is MS lying about how much life insurance in $$'s and the amount of policies he had on TS. = Motive IMO

Bingo!

 

[Skigirl]

In theory, a person could take out numerous policies (think cheap term policies) on someone if they have an "insurable interest" up to $100,000 each without requiring verification parameters such as a physical exam or signature. There is no limit to how many policies & no notification is sent to the party.

Heck, it is somewhat common for private companies to take out insurance on its executives---and it doesn't need to be terminated upon an executive's firing.

OMG -- are you SURE it can't be terminated if the key player were to be fired? How could the investors a company have an insurable interest in executives that are no longer with the company? Otherwise, instead of firing them, they should just take out a hit.

 

[MsArk]

Do we know when these policies were issued? I would think it is possible that they might have been issued in increments as her visibility (cable programs, etc) and earning potential increased. Hindsight is 20/20 but I am in the camp of not thinking her life insurance was excessive as she was the sole breadwinner with two young children to raise, educate, etc.
Is it a motive for murder? Absolutely! But I don't think TS thought her life was in danger. From just what I've read about her, I think she would have been gone, with her children, fired MS from the practice and changed beneficiaries if she thought for a second MS was capable of murder! We now know he was but I don't think she thought so....
JMO and don't flog me! [emoji4]

 

[RANCH]

I used a life insurance calculator and found that a 46 year old with zero savings and two children with a 300,000 a year income needs 3.6 million in life insurance.

400,000 comes in a 4.8 million.

200,000 comes in at 2.4 million.

Click on "Term Life Insurance Calculator" at the top of this link.

https://www.daveramsey.com/blog/termlife-calculator/

 

[KateB]

Do we know when these policies were issued? I would think it is possible that they might have been issued in increments as her visibility (cable programs, etc) and earning potential increased. Hindsight is 20/20 but I am in the camp of not thinking her life insurance was excessive as she was the sole breadwinner with two young children to raise, educate, etc.
Is it a motive for murder? Absolutely! But I don't think TS thought her life was in danger. From just what I've read about her, I think she would have been gone, with her children, fired MS from the practice and changed beneficiaries if she thought for a second MS was capable of murder! We now know he was but I don't think she thought so....
JMO and don't flog me! [emoji4]

breakdown of the life insurance

http://www.news-press.com/story/news/2015/12/01/7-things-know-sievers-murder/76554968/\

7 things to know:The Sievers murder

Mark Sievers told investigators he and his wife had $2.5 million life insurance policies. Authorities, however, found five policies for her: $300,000 from State Farm; $2.5 million and $500,000 from Ohio National Life; $1 million from Prudential Life; $133,342.84 from Jackson National Life. The arrest affidavit lists Hartford Business General Liability but doesn’t list an amount.

I believe we can pick out the issue dates from the discovery documents but it requires wading through dozens of pages of subpoena and legalese pages to find the issue dates. I'll bet someone has done that in the Batch 1 thread already.
The odd dollar amount one makes me think it is mortgage insurance and that might be the principal balance on the mortgage (but that's a guess.)

 

[Zuri]

Personally speaking, Regarding life insurance policies, my DH MD has $5M in life insurance policies. IIRC, One buys out his practice so there are no issues with his partner or me upon his death. The remainder is for me and my children to live on. And NO, I don't plan on his demise or doing anything to hasten his death.

I wasn't surprised at the amount of her life insurance as I assumed they covered the value of her practice as well as income potential. It is just so tragic that this may have served as motive for her death.

Katiecoolady's sister was murdered for this same reason 27 years ago. The 2 men responsible for her death are in prison in AZ. Her sister's new husband took out a large policy on her and brutally killed her 4 months later.

IMO

 

[CeaElle]

I will offer an unbiased opinion of the life insurance:

I work for high net worth individuals, many have multiple, substantial life ins. policies (personal, business and umbrella liability). It IS NOT unusual, for someone with vast earning potential to carry several million dollars of insurance, utilizing several policies.

The purpose of such policies are to cover debt (mortgage, CC, loans), pay for children's upbringing, college, sustain the family in their current and future standard of living, taking into account inflation and cost of living increases.

Most of the insurance companies I have worked with require a physical exam with lab studies. In the case of policies over 2 mil, financial docs are also required to substantiate the necessity. I am implying that TS knew of at least SOME, if not all of the big policies. I do not find this unusual, TS was a smart lady and would want her family well taken care of.

I do not have the capacity to earn anything even close to TS, yet I have a large policy, all beneficiary designations are made to my estate. I have estate docs, which when married, left 55% to my ex and 45% to a "minor's trust" for my child/ren. This protects the kiddos portion from being mixed in with the spouses portion. It is important to do this because, if your widow remarries, their new spouse has access to all the $$$. I also have co-trustees on the minor's trust and both must sign off on any withdrawals, one trustee from each side of the family. I PRAY that TS had her estate set up this way as well.

MS had at least one policy on himself, IIRC for 250k/500k.

 

[Frigga]

I think the damning part of the whole Life Insurance issue was the fact that Mark Sievers lied to the police about it. If TS knew and they were all legitimate, why lie?

 

[FelicityLemon]

I will offer an unbiased opinion of the life insurance:

I work for high net worth individuals, many have multiple, substantial life ins. policies (personal, business and umbrella liability). It IS NOT unusual, for someone with vast earning potential to carry several million dollars of insurance, utilizing several policies.

The purpose of such policies are to cover debt (mortgage, CC, loans), pay for children's upbringing, college, sustain the family in their current and future standard of living, taking into account inflation and cost of living increases.

Most of the insurance companies I have worked with require a physical exam with lab studies. In the case of policies over 2 mil, financial docs are also required to substantiate the necessity. I am implying that TS knew of at least SOME, if not all of the big policies. I do not find this unusual, TS was a smart lady and would want her family well taken care of.

I do not have the capacity to earn anything even close to TS, yet I have a large policy, all beneficiary designations are made to my estate. I have estate docs, which when married, left 55% to my ex and 45% to a "minor's trust" for my child/ren. This protects the kiddos portion from being mixed in with the spouses portion. It is important to do this because, if your widow remarries, their new spouse has access to all the $$$. I also have co-trustees on the minor's trust and both must sign off on any withdrawals, one trustee from each side of the family. I PRAY that TS had her estate set up this way as well.

MS had at least one policy on himself, IIRC for 250k/500k.

Thank you for the information. Excellent information and it's easy to forget how many holes are left with the loss of a spouse. Always great to get it from someone in the business.

I think a lot of people just don't realize ALL of the costs of living and especially when children are involved. We've been saying this forever, that if women/wives/mothers were paid for all the work they do, it'd outstrip a lot of their husbands. One cost to add is childcare. There are so many little things in addition to the big things, too. Counseling or therapy needed for family if they go that route can be very expensive.

You've inspired me to sit down and make a list with DH of what would be required should either of us die sooner than expected.