37 Besen Parkway, LLC v. John Hancock (U.S.A.) Settlement

Per the terms of the approved Settlement Agreement, a supplemental, or Phase II distribution on a pro rata basis was implemented to exhaust the remaining monies in the Settlement Fund. To be eligible to receive a supplemental check, you must have received an initial, or Phase I Settlement check, and have negotiated that check prior to its expiration date.

If you received a supplemental, or Phase II, check you were determined to have met the aforementioned criteria. The check constitutes full satisfaction of your distribution and the amount of your Settlement payment represents the pro rata share of the Net Settlement Fund for your eligible policy.

Please negotiate the check promptly. Checks indicate when they expire and are not negotiable after this date.

If you did not receive a supplemental, Phase II check, you did not meet the eligibility criteria. To be eligible to receive a supplemental, Phase II check, you must have received an initial, or Phase I Settlement check, and have negotiated that check prior to its expiration date.

You cannot dispute the amount of your Settlement Payment.

The amount of your Settlement Payment is final and represents the amount to which you were entitled under the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The Court approved the Settlement, including the methodology used to compute the amount of Settlement Payments, at the Final Approval Hearing.

Please negotiate the check promptly. Checks indicate when they expire and are not negotiable after this date.

We are no longer authorized to issue replacement initial, or Phase I checks. Furthermore, all of the remaining funds from non-negotiated initial checks have been redistributed to eligible participants via a supplemental, or Phase II distribution on July 2, 2020.

The deadline to request a reissue of your supplemental, or Phase II, Settlement check is September 30, 2020. After this date, we will no longer be able to reissue Phase II Settlement checks.

All reissue requests must be sent in writing to the Claims Administrator at the address listed below. All requests must include your full name, your return address, your signature, and, if possible, your policy number.

Besen Settlement Administrator
P.O. Box 3217
Portland, OR 97208-3217

Please send in your request, including appropriate documentation, as applicable, according to the following list:

• Lost or Damaged - If your check was lost or damaged please send a signed written request asking that a replacement check be reissued and mailed to you.
• Change of Address - To request a replacement check mailed to an updated address, please send a signed written request asking that a replacement check be reissued and mailed to you. Include in the request your current and former mailing addresses.
• Name Change - To request a check be reissued under a new name (e.g. last name change), please include instructions for the name that should be included on the replacement check and provide documentation showing this to be the case such as a marriage certificate, divorce decree, or court papers indicative of a name change.
• Name Removal - In order to have a name removed from a check reissue, either have both parties on the check sign a letter and return the check, or return the check with documentation that shows that one party is unable to negotiate the check (i.e. death certificate).
• Deceased Class Member - If the Class Member indicated on the check is deceased, please submit acceptable documentation showing that you are the beneficiary of his or her Estate. Acceptable documentation may be a death certificate, together with the pertinent portion of the Will, Trust, or Court Order/Letters of Testamentary naming you as Beneficiary, Personal Representative, Administrator, Executor, or Executrix.
• Incapacitated Class Member - If the Class Member cannot act on his or her own behalf, acceptable documentation is a Power of Attorney, or guardianship or custodial paperwork.
• Closed Business - If you are the legal representative of a business which is no longer active, please include a letter with instructions for the name that should be included on the replacement check, as well as documentation that you may have proving you are authorized to act on behalf of the business. Documentation may include Articles of Incorporation, Articles of Organization, Articles of Dissolution, or any other similar legal documentation that explicitly states the individual is an acting party for the business.

We will review the letter and documentation and will contact you if more information is required.

For reasons of security, a check reissue cannot take place until either the original check is received back by us, a mailing has been returned to us as undeliverable, or until the original stale date of the check has passed or expired. Because one of these events must occur before we can act on your request, it is generally not possible for us to provide an estimated date for the reissue to take place. We thank you for your patience.

The Court authorized this website because you have a right to know about the Settlement of this class action lawsuit, and about all of your options. The Notice explains the lawsuit, the Settlement and your legal rights.

Judge Paul G. Gardephe of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is overseeing this case. The case is known as 37 Besen Parkway, LLC v. John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.), Case No. 15-cv-9924, (the “Action”). The entity who sued is called the “Plaintiff.” The Defendant is John Hancock Life Insurance Company (USA).

The lawsuit alleged that John Hancock policyholders paid excessive COI charges not allowed by the terms of the policies, because John Hancock was allegedly required to review its rates every five years and COI rates were allegedly based on factors other than its expectations of future mortality experience. The lawsuit also alleged that John Hancock charged unauthorized Age 100 Waiver of Charges Rider (“Age 100 Rider”) charges on certain John Hancock life insurance policies.

All of the lawsuit’s claims can be found in Plaintiff’s Class Action Complaint available here.

John Hancock denies the allegations asserted in the Action and claims that it has done nothing wrong. John Hancock’s defenses to the claims in the lawsuit can be found in their Answer, available here. Nevertheless, given the risks, uncertainties, burden and expense of continued litigation, John Hancock agreed to settle.

In a class action, one or more people called class representatives (in this case, Plaintiff 37 Besen Parkway, LLC) sue on behalf of people who have similar claims. The people included in the class action are called the Settlement Class or Settlement Class members. The Court resolves the issues for all Settlement Class members, except for those who timely excluded themselves from the Settlement Class.

The Parties negotiated the Settlement at arms-length and with the assistance of an experienced mediator, the Honorable Theodore H. Katz (Ret.), and with a full understanding of the factual and legal issues that would affect the outcome of this lawsuit. During the course of the lawsuit, the Plaintiff, through its attorneys, thoroughly examined and investigated the facts and law relating to the issues in this case.

The Plaintiff believes that the final outcome of the lawsuit, if it were to proceed through trial and appeals, is uncertain. A settlement avoids the costs and risks of further litigation and provides immediate relief to the Settlement Class Members. As a result of their evaluation of the facts and law, the Plaintiff and its attorneys have determined that this Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. They have reached this conclusion due to the substantial benefits the Settlement provides to Settlement Class Members, the risks, uncertainties, and costs inherent in this Action, and the desirability of continuing this protracted litigation.

There has been no trial, and there has been no final determination on the merits of the Claims or defenses in this lawsuit, and there will be no trial or final determination on the merits of the Claims and defenses as the Court has Approved the Settlement. The Settlement does not suggest that John Hancock has or has not done anything wrong, or that the Plaintiff and the Settlement Class Members would or would not win if the lawsuit were to go to trial.

The Settlement Class includes the “COI Decrease Class” and the “Rider Overcharge Class.” The COI Decrease Class means current and former owners of John Hancock COI Decrease Class Policies, which are all universal and variable universal life insurance policies issued by John Hancock, or its predecessors, that state “The Applied Monthly Rates will be based on our expectations of future mortality experience.” Excluded from the COI Decrease Class Policies are:

1. Policies that disclose factors on which “Applied Monthly Rates will be based” other than or in addition to “expectations of future mortality experience”; and
2. John Hancock Flex V-2 Life Insurance Policies (Policy Form 94-85). The Rider Overcharge Class means current and former owners of John Hancock Rider Overcharge Class Policies.

You may check whether you are a member of the class by entering your policy number here.

Excluded from the Settlement Class are:

1. All such persons and entities that submit a timely and valid written request to be excluded from the Settlement Class,
2. Class Counsel and their employees, and
3. The judge presiding over the Action and the staff and immediate family of such judicial official.

If you received a Notice in the mail, then John Hancock’s records show you may be a Class Member.

You may check whether you are a member of the class by entering your policy number here.

John Hancock agreed to fund a cash Settlement Fund in the amount of $91,250,000. The Settlement Fund will be used to pay Court approved Settlement Administration Expenses, Plaintiff’s Service Awards, Class Counsel’s Fees and Expenses, and all settlement relief to Settlement Class Members. The Settlement Fund, less all Court approved Settlement Administration Expenses, Plaintiff’s Service Awards, and Class Counsel’s Fees and Expenses is called the “Net Settlement Fund.” No portion of the Settlement Fund will revert to John Hancock.

Settlement checks were mailed to the owners of Settlement Class Policies on a pro rata (or proportional) basis as follows: a minimum settlement payment of $100 per policy plus a share of the remaining Net Settlement Fund, in proportion to the Settlement Class Members’ share of the overall COI and Age 100 Rider overcharges paid during the applicable statute of limitations through August 2016. Policies owned by class members issued before December 31, 1996 shall have alleged COI overcharges discounted by half due to an alleged prior release in Duhaime et al. v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, et al. (D. Mass. 1996).

You should consult your own tax advisors regarding the tax consequences of the Settlement, including any benefits you receive and any tax reporting obligations you may have as a result.

The deadline to Exclude yourself (‘Opt Out’) from the Settlement was February 4, 2019.

Unless you timely excluded yourself from the Settlement, you cannot sue or be part of any other lawsuit against John Hancock about the issues for the policies in this case, including any existing litigation, arbitration, or proceeding. Unless you timely excluded yourself, all of the decisions and judgments by the Court bind you. If you did nothing at all, you will be releasing John Hancock from all of the claims described and identified in Section 5 of the Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement.

This release includes any and all claims asserted in the Action, that might have been asserted in the Action or that hereafter may be asserted arising out of or related to the facts, transactions, events, occurrences, acts, disclosures, statements, omissions, or failures to act concerning allegations that (a) Defendant breached the COI Decrease Class Policies by considering non-mortality factors, such as, for example, expenses (including without limitation, administrative, maintenance, and acquisition expenses, sales commissions, taxes, and fees) reinsurance costs, persistency, future investment income, or profit, in determining Applied Monthly Rates or failing to adjust or decrease Applied Monthly Rates or any other charge to reflect changing mortality expectations; or (b) Defendant breached the Rider Overcharge Class Policies by charging Age 100 Waiver Monthly Rates in excess of that permitted by the Rider Overcharge Class Policies. Released Claims do not include Excluded Claims. Released Claims expressly includes all Claims that were or could be asserted in the Action or based on Defendant’s calculation and deduction of its Cost of Insurance Charge, Applied Monthly Rates, Age 100 Waiver of Charges Rider and other rates (i.e., Maintenance and Expense Charges and Age). Released Claims expressly include all claims that Defendant failed to decrease its Applied Monthly Rate or may have a future obligation to decrease the Applied Monthly Rate for any reason.

Released Claims do not include claims arising from any failure by Defendant to pay any future death benefits owed. Released Claims also do not include new claims against Defendant that could not have been asserted in the Action based solely upon a future increase in Defendant’s Applied Monthly Rate scale should that occur after the date of the Agreement.

Settlement Class Members expressly waive any and all rights that they may have under any law that would limit the release to claims actually known or suspected to exist at the time of the Settlement, including the provisions of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows: “GENERAL RELEASE-CLAIMS EXTINGUISHED. A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.”

The Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement is available here. The Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement describes in detail the claims that you give up if you remain in the Settlement, so read it carefully. You can talk to the law firms representing the Class listed in FAQ 17 for free, or you can, at your own expense, talk to your own lawyer if you have any questions about the released claims or what they mean.

The deadline to Exclude yourself (‘Opt Out’) from the Settlement was February 4, 2019.

No. Unless you timely excluded yourself, you gave up the right to sue John Hancock for the claims for the policies that the Settlement resolves. You must have timely excluded yourself from this Settlement Class in order to try to pursue your own lawsuit.

The deadline to Exclude yourself (‘Opt Out’) from the Settlement was February 4, 2019.

No. You will not get a payment if you timely excluded yourself from the Settlement.

Yes. The Court appointed the following lawyers as Class Counsel.

If you have questions, you may contact these lawyers. You will not be charged for contacting these lawyers. If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, however, you may hire one at your own expense.

The Court determined how much Class Counsel was to be paid for fees and expenses. Class Counsel sought an award for up to one-third of the Settlement Fund plus reimbursement of Class Counsel’s expenses, to be paid from the Settlement Fund. The Court awarded Class Counsel’s request, totaling $29,737,443.86, which was paid from the Settlement Fund. Settlement Class Members are not responsible for direct payment of Class Counsel’s fees and expenses.

Class Counsel also requested a service award payment to the named Plaintiff in the amount of $40,000 for each representative of Plaintiff that testified in this action to compensate named Plaintiff for efforts undertaken by it on behalf of the Settlement Class. The Court awarded $40,000 each for the two representatives who testified in this action.

The Deadline to Object to the Settlement was February 4, 2019.

The Court granted Final Approval of the Settlement on March 31, 2019 and entered the Final Judgment on April 4, 2019.

Objecting is telling the Court that you do not like something about the Settlement. You can object to the Settlement only if you do not exclude yourself from the Settlement. Excluding yourself from the Settlement is telling the Court that you don’t want to be part of the Settlement. If you exclude yourself from the Settlement, you have no basis to object to the Settlement because it no longer affects you.

The Court held the Fairness Hearing on March 18, 2019, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Courtroom 705, United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007-1312. At the hearing, the Court considered whether the Settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate. If there were any objections, the Court considered them at the hearing. The Court also decided how much to pay and reimburse Class Counsel, and the approval of any service award payments to the named Plaintiff. The Court granted Final Approval of the Settlement on March 31, 2019 and entered the Final Judgment on April 4, 2019.

This website summarizes the Settlement. More details can be found in the Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement and other Important Documents here, or by writing to:

Besen Settlement Administrator
P.O. Box 3217
Portland, OR 97208-3217