Talk:Life Partners, Inc.

Alleged class action suit?

If there is a class action suit against the company that warrants mention in the article, it needs to have been covered in independent reliable sources. The website set up by the attorney representing the class for the suit is not independent and not a sufficient source. —C.Fred (talk) 21:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 5 July 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved as clear consensus has been established. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Music1201 ^talk 07:21, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

---

• Life Partners (film) → Life Partners
• Life Partners → Life Partners, Inc.

– The company is not a clear primary topic for this term. Pageview analysis overwhelmingly favours the film. PC78 (talk) 22:33, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Good use of natural disambiguation, and the film appears to be the primary topic. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 20:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support first and oppose second 2601:541:4305:C70:B120:AFA5:4806:E8C3 (talk) 17:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Why? This is not a vote, you're supposed to present an argument. PC78 (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Life Partners, Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140124121407/http://www.princeton.edu/economics/seminar-present-week-schedule/lapse-based-insurance.pdf to http://www.princeton.edu/economics/seminar-present-week-schedule/lapse-based-insurance.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

PUFF PIECE

This article contains a number of inaccuracies. The stock is worthless; all the company's assets were placed into two separate trusts by order of the bankruptcy judge, and the company did not resume its business.

And it is not, perhaps, obvious that most (or all) who bought policies from Life Partners were told that the life expectancy of those who were issued the policies being sold was under 36 months. As it turned out, many original policyholders lived so long that those who bought the policies through Life Partners had to pay substantial premiums to keep the policies in force. Some of the original policyholders are still alive after 15 years!

In short, the article reads as if written by representatives of Life Partners, Inc. C. Cerf (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2023 (UTC)