Legit LLQP Exam Download

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Adèle seeks an immediate term annuity with payments starting in one month, funded by a lump sum. In annuity contracts (Civil Code, Article 2368), “alienation” means transferring capital ownership to the insurer, which then guarantees payments. Option A explains this: once Adèle’s $300,000 is alienated, the insurer assumes control, and with payments starting in one month, it’s in the payment phase (no significant accumulation). This aligns with an immediate annuity per the LLQP. Option B is incorrect—alienation means Adèle loses ownership, barring emergency access. Option C’s “deferred annuity” contradicts the one-month start. Option D misuses “capitalization phase” (growth period) for an immediate annuity already paying out. The Ethics manual requires advisors like Germain to clarify terms simply and accurately.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Under the Distribution Act (Sections 16–18), insurance representatives like Pierre have a duty to act in the client’s best interest by providing clear, accurate information about products, including coverage and exclusions. This aligns with the LLQP’s emphasis on needs-based advising and the Civil Code’s requirement of good faith (Article 1375). Option A correctly outlines Pierre’s responsibility to explain products and exclusions, ensuring Carole makes an informed decision. Option B (handing over brochures without explanation) fails to meet the proactive advisory role mandated by the Ethics and Professional Practice manual, risking misunderstanding. Option C (conference call) is impractical and shifts Pierre’s duty to the insurer. Option D (written questions to the insurer) similarly avoids Pierre’s obligation to directly assist Carole. The manual stresses full disclosure and client education, making A the ethical and legal standard.

Under Quebec’s "separation as to property" regime, each spouse retains ownership of their assets unless joint ownership exists. However, the family patrimony typically mandates the division of certain assets, regardless of marital property regimes, unless waived by mutual consent. As they waived the family patrimony, they are exempt from dividing family assets. However, jointly-owned assets such as the cottage acquired together would require division. Isaac's dental practice and life insurance policy are personal assets and not subject to division as they fall outside jointly-owned property​​.

=================

In Quebec, an irrevocable beneficiary designation remains in effect even after a divorce, unless the policyholder takes steps to change it. Because Rajbir is designated as the irrevocable beneficiary, Surjit would require Rajbir’s consent to alter the beneficiary designation. Since Surjit intends to keep Rajbir as the beneficiary, he does not need to take any additional action, as the irrevocable beneficiary status remains in force. Surjit cannot change or remove Rajbir as the beneficiary without her consent, so his current designation remains unaffected by the divorce under LLQP guidelines and Quebec civil code rules on irrevocable beneficiaries​​.

=================