Free IFSE Institute LLQP Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 4

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Under Quebec’s Civil Code, specifically within the framework of family patrimony (Articles 414–426), the partition of property upon divorce includes assets acquired during the marriage that are designated as part of the family patrimony. The family home, cars, RRSPs (Registered Retirement Savings Plans), and benefits accrued under the RRQ (Régie des rentes du Québec, or Quebec Pension Plan) are already listed, as they are explicitly included under Article 415. However, family patrimony also encompasses other property used for the family’s benefit, such as bank accounts that hold funds accumulated during the marriage for family use. TFSAs (Tax-Free Savings Accounts) are individual savings accounts, but if they were used for family purposes or funded with marital income, they could also be considered. The Ethics and Professional Practice (Civil Law) manual emphasizes thatadvisors must ensure clients fully understand the scope of divisible assets under family patrimony rules to avoid omissions. Life insurance cash surrender values (option C) are not automatically included in family patrimony unless designated for family use, and “nothing else” (option D) overlooks additional divisible assets like bank accounts. Option B, “Bank accounts and TFSAs,” correctly expands the list to include other relevant marital property, aligning with the Civil Code’s broad interpretation of family patrimony.

When a beneficiary is designated as "revocable" and predeceases the policyholder, their share of the benefit typically reverts to the surviving beneficiaries rather than the deceased beneficiary’s estate. In this case, since Michelle has predeceased Danny, her portion of the benefit is divided equally between Donna-Joe and Stephanie, the remaining beneficiaries. Therefore, each of them would receive 50% of the total death benefit, which is $500,000. If the beneficiaries had been designated as "irrevocable" or if there were specific contingent beneficiaries, different rules might apply​​.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Gary’s scheme involves creating a fictional company to fraudulently sell insurance, constituting fraud under the Criminal Code of Canada (Section 380), punishable by up to 14 years imprisonment if Samya participates. Option C reflects this severe legal consequence. Option A (CSF sanctions) applies to ethical breaches within professional conduct, like fines or suspension, but fraud exceeds this scope. Option B (Distribution Act penalties) includes fines up to $175,000 (Section 458), not $1,000,000, and is less severe than criminal charges. Option D (liability insurance) is irrelevant, as it doesn’t mitigate criminal liability. The Ethics manual and LLQP prohibit fraudulent acts, emphasizing criminal repercussions for such schemes.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: In life insurance, the policyholder owns the contract and has the authority to change the beneficiary, per the Civil Code of Quebec (Article 2425). Claudie’s mother, as the policyholder, must submit a written request to the insurer to designate Marc-André as the new beneficiary, making option A correct. Option B is incorrect because the beneficiary (Claudie’s mother) has no control over changing the designation—only the policyholder does. Option C is wrong, as the insured (Claudie) has no inherent right to alter the beneficiary unless she is also the policyholder, which she is not. Option D misstates the goal—Claudie wants a beneficiary change, not a policyholder change. The Ethics and Professional Practice manual stresses that advisors must ensure clients understand policy ownership rights and procedures for beneficiary changes.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Antoine’s duty as an insurance representative, per the Distribution Act (Sections 16–18) and Civil Code (Article 2408), includes assessing Alexandre’s risk profile and explaining policy terms, especially exclusions. Mountain climbing is a high-risk activity that many insurers exclude or restrict, but this is not a blanket legal exclusion under the Civil Code (contrary to option A). Option B is correct: Antoine must review the specific policy’s exclusion clauses and inform Alexandre that a claim could be denied if death occurs during mountain climbing, ensuring informed consent. Option C misinterprets the Quebec Charter (Sections 10–20), which prohibits discrimination but allows insurers to set risk-based exclusions (private contract freedom, Article 1378). Option D neglects Antoine’s obligation to disclose material exclusions, risking misrepresentation. The Ethics and Professional Practice manual mandates full disclosure of risks and exclusions to uphold client trust and compliance.

In Ontario, the pension legislation stipulates that a spouse is entitled to receive a minimum of 50% of the member’s pension benefits as a survivor benefit if the member dies. This applies to defined benefit pension plans (DBPP), which provide a predetermined benefit upon retirement.Therefore, as the spouse of Maria, Juan would be entitled to receive at least half of Maria’s pension upon her death, as specified by Ontario pension regulations. This survivor benefit is a guaranteed right and requires consent from both spouses for any reduction or waiver. Options C and D are incorrect as Ontario law mandates a minimum 50% survivor benefit without provision for reduction to 25%, and Juan's entitlement is tied to their marital status and statutory rights, which may not apply if they are separated or divorced at the time of Maria's death. Option A is incorrect because Ontario legislation does not provide for an increased benefit by waiving the survivor benefit​​.

Insurance records must generally be retained for a minimum period to comply with provincialregulatory requirements, which is often five years from the date of termination. This helps ensure compliance with record-keeping mandates and allows for any legal, financial, or administrative review if needed. Gino is obligated to retain Nathan’s file until it has been closed for at least five years, despite the change in representation or policy status​​.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Gold’s role as a financial security advisor, per the Distribution Act (Section 16), requires him to act competently and in the client’s best interest. Tax advice, wills, and mandates in case of incapacity (Civil Code, Articles 2166–2174) often exceed an advisor’s expertise, necessitating referral to specialists like tax experts and notaries. By not proposing such collaboration, Gold risks providing incomplete or inaccurate advice, breaching his duty of care to the client (option B). Option A (the public) is too broad, as no public harm is evident. Option C (other professionals) is unaffected, as no direct duty to them is breached. Option D (the profession) could apply indirectly via reputational harm, but theprimary breach is to the client. The Ethics and Professional Practice manual mandates advisors to recognize their limits and refer clients appropriately.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation: Pension funds from a defined contribution plan, upon leaving employment, must follow Quebec’s Supplemental Pension Plans Act (SPPA) and federal tax rules. The $88,000 is “locked-in,” meaning it cannot be cashed out and must be transferred to a Locked-In Retirement Account (LIRA) to preserve its pension status (SPPA,Section 98). A LIRA restricts access until retirement, when it must be converted into a life annuity or Life Income Fund (LIF) by December 31 of the year the holder turns 71 (Income Tax Act, Section 146). Option D correctly identifies the LIRA and LIF/annuity options. Option A (RRSP) applies to non-locked-in funds, not pension benefits. Option B’s “RRIF” is incorrect, as locked-in funds use a LIF in Quebec. Option C (immediate RRIF withdrawal) violates locking-in rules and age requirements. The Ethics manual requires advisors to clarify locked-in fund rules for clients.

Dario’s conduct at the dinner party and afterward constitutes a breach of his duties and obligations towards the public. Insurance professionals are expected to maintain high standards of professionalism and respect the privacy and comfort of individuals they interact with. By persistently following Andrew and subsequently pressuring him with daily calls and unsolicited gifts, Dario failed to demonstrate respect for personal boundaries. This behavior could be seen as unprofessional and could harm the public’s trust in the industry. According to LLQP guidelines and ethical standards, agents must avoid aggressive solicitation and respect the autonomy and privacy of the public​​.

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