If you purchased an Indexed Universal Life (IUL) insurance policy from Equitable AXA and discovered it was not performing as promised, you may be entitled to compensation. Equitable AXA has faced numerous lawsuits and regulatory actions for misleading sales practices. These actions resulted in hundreds of millions in settlements and penalties. At RP Legal LLC, our fraud attorneys have recovered over $100 million for clients harmed by deceptive insurance schemes.
Many policyholders received promises that their Equitable AXA IUL policies would provide tax-free retirement income and guaranteed growth. However, they discovered their policies were underperforming, requiring additional premium payments, or at risk of lapsing entirely. These misrepresentations constitute investment fraud. Additionally, affected policyholders have legal options to recover their losses.
Understanding Equitable AXA IUL Fraud
What Are Indexed Universal Life Insurance Policies?
Indexed Universal Life (IUL) insurance policies are complex financial products that combine life insurance coverage with an investment component tied to stock market indices like the S&P 500. Unlike traditional whole life insurance, IUL policies allow policyholders to allocate premium payments between insurance costs and investment accounts that track market performance.
The appeal of IUL policies lies in their promise of market upside potential with downside protection through guaranteed minimum returns, typically 0% or 1%. However, these policies come with significant limitations including participation rates, cap rates, and various fees that can severely limit actual returns. Furthermore, insurance companies often market these products as alternatives to traditional retirement accounts. They emphasize tax advantages and growth potential while downplaying the risks and costs.
Common Fraudulent Practices by Equitable AXA
Equitable AXA has engaged in several deceptive practices that have harmed policyholders nationwide. The most common fraudulent practices include:
Misleading Illustrations and Projections: Sales agents routinely presented policy illustrations showing unrealistic returns, often projecting 7-8% annual growth without adequately explaining the impact of fees, caps, and participation rates. These illustrations failed to show how policies would perform in realistic market conditions or during periods of low interest rates.
Misrepresentation of Costs: Agents failed to adequately disclose the true cost structure of IUL policies, including cost of insurance charges that increase with age, administrative fees, and surrender charges. Many policyholders discovered these costs were much higher than initially represented. As a result, their policies underperformed dramatically.
Unsuitable Sales to Seniors: Equitable AXA agents frequently targeted older adults, selling IUL policies as retirement income solutions despite the products being inappropriate for their age and financial situation. The SEC specifically cited Equitable for misleading practices targeting public school teachers and staff members.
False Claims About Tax Benefits: Agents promoted IUL policies as providing “tax-free retirement income” similar to Roth IRAs, without explaining the complex tax implications of policy loans and the risk of creating taxable events if policies lapse.
How IUL Policies Were Misrepresented as Retirement Plans
One of the most serious aspects of Equitable AXA’s sales practices involved marketing IUL policies as superior alternatives to traditional retirement plans like 401(k)s and IRAs. Agents used phrases like “be your own bank” and “tax-free retirement income” to convince consumers that IUL policies could replace their retirement benefits.
These sales presentations typically emphasized the upside potential of market-linked returns while minimizing or ignoring the significant risks. Agents failed to explain that policy loans reduce death benefits and can cause policies to lapse if not managed carefully. They also neglected to mention that IUL policies lack the contribution limits and employer matching benefits of qualified retirement plans.
The reality is that IUL policies are primarily insurance products with investment features, not retirement planning vehicles. The insurance costs and fees associated with these policies often make them unsuitable as primary retirement savings tools. This is particularly true for older individuals who face higher mortality charges and may be victims of financial elder abuse.
Major Equitable AXA Settlements and Legal Actions
The $307.5 Million Brach Family Foundation Settlement
In 2023, Equitable AXA agreed to pay $307.5 million to settle a class action lawsuit brought by the Brach Family Foundation and other policyholders. This landmark settlement addressed claims that Equitable improperly increased cost of insurance charges on flexible-premium universal life policies issued from 2004 onward.
The lawsuit alleged that Equitable violated its contractual obligations by implementing cost increases that actual mortality experience or regulatory requirements did not justify. The settlement required Equitable to provide credits to affected policyholders and modify its practices going forward. Legal fees in the case totaled $101.08 million, paid to the law firm Susman Godfrey.
This settlement significantly impacted Equitable’s financial projections. The case demonstrates the substantial financial consequences companies face when they engage in deceptive practices with life insurance products.
SEC’s $50 Million Penalty Against Equitable
In July 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission imposed a $50 million penalty on Equitable for misleading practices in retirement plan sales. The SEC found that Equitable failed to adequately disclose conflicts of interest and provided misleading information to plan participants, particularly public school teachers and staff members.
The enforcement action revealed that Equitable’s sales practices prioritized company profits over client interests. Agents received higher compensation for selling proprietary products regardless of their suitability for individual investors. The SEC required Equitable to pay the penalty to a fund for harmed investors and implement comprehensive compliance reforms.
This regulatory action highlights the systemic nature of Equitable’s problematic sales practices. Additionally, it provides evidence for individual policyholders pursuing securities fraud claims and broker misconduct cases.
Recent Court Decisions and Ongoing Litigation
Recent court decisions have provided mixed results for Equitable AXA policyholders. In January 2025, the New York Court of Appeals decided Hobish v AXA Equitable Life Insurance Co., addressing claims of breach of contract and violations of New York’s General Business Law. The court affirmed the dismissal of all claims against AXA, ruling that Equitable did not breach contract terms regarding cost-of-insurance charges.
Multiple class action lawsuits remain pending against Equitable AXA, including cases challenging the company’s sales practices, fee structures, and policy administration. These ongoing cases provide additional avenues for recovery for affected policyholders.
Signs You May Have Been Defrauded
Misleading Sales Presentations and Illustrations
If your Equitable AXA agent presented policy illustrations showing consistent high returns without adequately explaining the risks and limitations, you may have been defrauded. Warning signs include:
- Projections showing 7-8% annual returns without explaining caps and participation rates
- Comparisons to stock market performance without mentioning fees and insurance costs
- Claims that the policy would “never lose money” or had “no downside risk”
- Presentations focusing on optimal scenarios without showing realistic or worst-case outcomes
- Failure to explain how rising insurance costs would affect policy performance over time
Excessive Fees and Hidden Costs
Many Equitable AXA policyholders discover their policies have much higher costs than initially disclosed. Red flags include:
- Cost of insurance charges that increase significantly over time
- Administrative fees and policy charges not clearly explained during the sales process
- Surrender charges that make it expensive to cancel or modify the policy
- Premium loads that reduce the amount actually invested in the policy’s cash value
- Fees for policy loans or withdrawals that agents did not adequately disclose
Unsuitable Recommendations for Your Age or Financial Situation
IUL policies are not appropriate for all investors, particularly older adults or those with limited financial resources. Signs of unsuitable sales include:
- Recommendations to replace existing life insurance or retirement accounts with IUL policies
- Sales to individuals over age 60 without adequate explanation of increasing insurance costs
- Recommendations to fund IUL policies instead of maximizing employer 401(k) matching
- Sales to individuals who could not afford the long-term premium commitments required
- Failure to conduct adequate suitability analysis based on your financial goals and risk tolerance
Legal Options for Equitable AXA IUL Victims
Filing Claims Against Insurance Agents and Brokers
Policyholders who were defrauded by Equitable AXA agents have several legal options. Individual claims can be filed against both the insurance agents who sold the policies and the companies that employed them. These claims typically allege:
Misrepresentation and Fraud: Agents made false statements about policy performance, costs, or benefits that induced you to purchase the policy. This includes presenting misleading illustrations or making verbal promises not supported by the policy contract.
Broker Negligence: Agents failed to meet professional standards in recommending and selling the policy. This includes failure to conduct adequate suitability analysis or explain material risks.
Breach of Fiduciary Duty: In some circumstances, insurance agents owe fiduciary duties to their clients. They can be held liable for prioritizing their own interests over client welfare.
Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claims
When insurance agents or financial advisors recommend IUL policies, they may owe fiduciary duties to their clients depending on the nature of the relationship and applicable state law. Breach of fiduciary duty claims can be particularly powerful because they require agents to act in their clients’ interests rather than their own.
These claims often focus on conflicts of interest, such as agents receiving higher commissions for selling IUL policies compared to other products. They also address failure to supervise and failure to disclose that recommended policies primarily benefit the agent or insurance company rather than the client.
Joining Class Action Lawsuits
Class action lawsuits allow multiple policyholders with similar claims to join together in a single case. This approach shares legal costs and increases leverage against large insurance companies. Several class actions are currently pending against Equitable AXA. New cases may be filed as additional evidence of wrongdoing emerges.
Class actions can be particularly effective for addressing systemic problems like misleading sales practices or improper fee increases that affect large numbers of policyholders. However, individual claims may be more appropriate for policyholders with unique circumstances or substantial damages.
How RP Legal LLC Can Help
Our Track Record with IUL Fraud Cases
RP Legal LLC has established itself as a recognized firm in IUL fraud litigation nationwide. Our founding partner, Robert G. Rikard, has recovered over $100 million for clients harmed by deceptive insurance schemes. He has litigated hundreds of IUL cases across the country and holds the AV® Preeminent rating from Martindale-Hubbell.
We have extensive experience with the complex legal and financial issues involved in IUL fraud cases, including:
- Analysis of policy illustrations and sales presentations
- Expert testimony on insurance industry standards and practices
- Investigation of agent training and compensation structures
- Calculation of damages including lost investment opportunities
- Negotiation of settlements and trial advocacy
Our case results demonstrate our commitment to recovering maximum compensation for our clients.
No Upfront Costs – Contingency Fee Basis
We understand that many IUL fraud victims have already suffered significant financial losses and cannot afford to pay attorney fees upfront. That’s why we handle IUL fraud cases on a contingency fee basis. This means you pay no attorney fees unless we recover compensation for you.
Our contingency fee arrangement aligns our interests with yours – we only succeed when you succeed. This allows us to take on complex cases against well-funded insurance companies without requiring clients to bear the financial risk of litigation.
We also advance all case expenses, including expert witness fees, court costs, and investigation expenses. Therefore, you have no out-of-pocket costs while pursuing your claim.
Nationwide Representation
IUL fraud affects policyholders across the United States. We represent clients nationwide in their claims against Equitable AXA and other insurance companies. Our attorneys are admitted to practice in multiple jurisdictions and have experience with the varying state laws that govern insurance fraud claims.
We have successfully handled cases in federal and state courts throughout the country. Additionally, we have served on multidistrict litigation (MDL) steering committees in complex insurance fraud cases. Our national practice allows us to identify patterns of misconduct and share resources across multiple cases.
Our Legal Team
Our experienced legal team includes:
- Robert G. Rikard – Founding Partner with 28 years of experience
- Peter Protopapas – Partner specializing in complex business litigation
- Lindsay F. Johnson – Associate Attorney with expertise in investment losses
Financial and Insurance Firms We Target
Several large insurance firms have been implicated in class action IUL lawsuits. Below is a list of some of the brokerages and firms we might investigate:
Insurance Companies
- Allianz
- Columbus Life
- Family First Life
- Minnesota Life/Securian Financial
- National Life Group
- Pacific Life
- Protective
- Prudential
- Transamerica
Financial Firms
- Ameritas
- Equis Financial
- Equitable AXA
- Five Rings Financial
- Global Atlantic (Accordia)
- Integrity Marketing Group
- John Hancock
- LifePro Financial
- Mutual of Omaha
- North American
- Penn Mutual
- PHP Agency
- Symetra
- Symmetry Financial Group
- World Financial Group
Frequently Asked Questions About Equitable AXA IUL Lawsuits
What is the statute of limitations for filing an Equitable AXA IUL lawsuit?
The statute of limitations varies by state and the type of claim being filed. Generally, fraud claims must be filed within 2-6 years of discovering the fraud, while contract claims may have longer limitation periods. It’s important to consult with an attorney promptly to protect your rights.
How much compensation can I receive from an IUL fraud lawsuit?
Compensation depends on several factors including the amount you invested in the policy, the losses you suffered, and the strength of your fraud claims. Damages may include the difference between what your policy was worth and what you were promised, plus additional damages for fraud in some cases.
Do I need to pay attorney fees upfront for an IUL lawsuit?
No. We handle IUL fraud cases on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay no attorney fees unless we recover compensation for you. We also advance all case expenses, so you have no out-of-pocket costs while pursuing your claim.
What evidence do I need to prove IUL fraud?
Key evidence includes your policy documents, sales presentations or illustrations shown to you, correspondence with your agent, and documentation of your financial situation at the time of purchase. We can help gather additional evidence through discovery and investigation.
Can I still file a lawsuit if my policy is still active?
Yes. You may have claims even if your policy is still in force, particularly if you’ve had to pay additional premiums beyond what was initially projected or if your policy is not performing as promised. The key is whether you were defrauded at the time of sale.
How long does an IUL fraud lawsuit typically take?
The timeline varies depending on the complexity of the case and whether it settles or goes to trial. Simple cases may resolve within 12-18 months, while complex cases can take 2-3 years or longer. We work efficiently to resolve cases as quickly as possible while maximizing recovery for our clients.
What makes Equitable AXA IUL policies particularly problematic?
Equitable AXA has faced multiple regulatory actions and lawsuits for misleading sales practices, including the $307.5 million Brach Family Foundation settlement and the SEC’s $50 million penalty. The company has a documented history of prioritizing profits over client interests and failing to adequately disclose policy risks and costs.
Can I join a class action lawsuit against Equitable AXA?
Several class action lawsuits are pending against Equitable AXA. You may be eligible to participate depending on when you purchased your policy and the specific claims being made. We can evaluate whether joining a class action or filing an individual lawsuit would be more beneficial for your situation.
If you believe you were defrauded by Equitable AXA in connection with an IUL policy purchase, contact RP Legal LLC today for a free consultation. Our experienced attorneys will review your case and explain your legal options at no cost to you. Don’t let insurance company fraud go unpunished – call us at (803) 805-7546 or complete our online contact form to get started.
Related Posts
- Pacific Life IUL Lawsuits: Legal Help for Defrauded Policyholders
- Allianz IUL Lawsuit: Fighting Deceptive Sales Practices
- Minnesota Life Securian Financial IUL Lawsuits
- National Life Group IUL Lawsuits
- Transamerica IUL Lawsuits
- Why IULs Are a Bad Investment: Understanding the Risks
- IUL vs Whole Life Insurance: Key Differences Explained
- IUL Fees Explained: Hidden Costs That Drain Your Policy
- How Does IUL Premium Financing Work?
- Investment Fraud Red Flags: Warning Signs to Watch For