LLQP Exam Dumps : Life License Qualification Program (LLQP)

Arthur’s eligibility for Long-Term Care (LTC) benefits depends on his inability to perform a specified number ofActivities of Daily Living (ADLs), which generally include bathing, dressing, feeding, toileting, transferring, and continence. In most LTC policies, to qualify for benefits, the policyholder typically needs to be unable to perform at least two of these ADLs. In Arthur's case, while he requires help with dressing and meal preparation, he can perform other ADLs such as feeding himself and bathing (with some assistance). This indicates that he can perform enough ADLs to make him ineligible under the typical LTC requirements​. Therefore, option D is correct, as his inability to dress alone does not meet the usual threshold required for benefit eligibility under most LTC policies.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Under the Civil Code of Quebec (Article 2415), a policyholder (or subscriber) is the entity that owns and pays for an insurance or annuity contract, which can be an individual or a legal person like a corporation. Xtra, as a company, can use its retained earnings (unregistered capital) to fund an annuity contract and be designated as the policyholder, making option D correct. Option A is false, as legal persons can own contracts (e.g., group insurance). Option B’s requirement of a registered plan is incorrect—annuities can be funded with non-registered funds. Option C introduces a “subrogated annuitant,” a misnomer here, as the annuitant is the person receiving payments, not a decision-maker, and no such requirement exists. The LLQP and Ethics manual confirm that corporations can be policyholders for business purposes, like key person coverage or investments.

Comprehensive and Detailed in Depth Explanation with Exact Extract from Documents and Guides:

In a joint first-to-die policy, the death benefit is paid to the surviving insured (primary beneficiary)upon the first death, unless altered. TheIFSE Ethics and Professional Practice Course (Common Law)states that beneficiary designations remain valid unless changed, and divorce does not automatically revoke them in most Canadian common law jurisdictions (unlike some family law contexts). Here, Chad is the primary beneficiary, and the adult children are secondary (contingent) beneficiaries, payable only if Chad predeceased Rachel. Since Rachel died first and the designation wasn’t updated post-divorce, Chad receives the benefit. Joint payment (A) or children claiming first (B) contradicts the primary/secondary structure, and Rachel’s parents (D) have no standing. Thus, C is correct.