income / payment protection

u751904

I am considering purchasing income / payment protection. I know the two things are different. I have not been told that my job is at risk or have reason to believe that I am going to be made redundant. Apart from the fact that watch the news and the state of the economy is very worrying that is. Just wondered whether anyone has any good news stories about these polcies. There are usually objections to this kind of insurance. For me I am the main wage earner I am concerned about maintaining my income I am in a specialist role and in an area of the country that isn't very heavily populated / not much business so I don't want to take chances. Some / most seem to only cover a proportion of you income so I am considering taking out a couple of policies to spread the risk. I can't see any reason why not to do that eg small print.

I started to think that the payouts for these companies must be getting more frequent hence my concern with how likely they are to wriggle out of the agreement or am I just cynical. I guess I know you only know if you have good insurance when you make a claim.

Z.

dodgyeyes

My personal view would be to take out income protection insurance as opposed to payment protection. That way you are guaranteeing a proportion of your income as opposed to specific payments.

I have been claiming income protection via my employer for the past 4 years and I am so glad he had it in place. It covers my specific occupation which unfortunately I am unable to do any more (be careful, some policies cover any occupation which is much harder to claim on) until retirement. Initially, it did not kick in until one month after stopping work and at that time it made up the difference between Statutory Sick Pay and 75% of my income. Once SSP stopped (because the govt perceived I could do other employment) then the policy covered the remaining % only up to 75%.

The only time in my experience insurance companies try to wriggle out of paying is if you are not upfront with all the information ie., non-disclosure. Just make sure that the policy you take out covers your specific needs ie., redundancy.

I hope this helps.

OshayAway

u751904 wrote: »

Some / most seem to only cover a proportion of you income so I am considering taking out a couple of policies to spread the risk. I can't see any reason why not to do that eg small print.

There are limits I'm affraid. This is based on government legislation and applies to income protection and MPPI/ASU policies regardsless of payouts for unemployment or disability.

Otherwise, what would stop someone having two, three or ten policies? The ability to afford the cover does not automatically mean you're entitled to it. Basically it's to ensure an individual is not as well off financially, not working.

The good news is that the benefit is tax free and you would still be entitiled to State benefits in addition to the benefit under the policy. So the short-fall may not be as much as you think.

u751904

ok thank you. In the meantime I have taken out paymentsheild for about £11 a month. I've read through everything. It is unemployment cover for mortgage protection only. I note the comment about taking out payment cover as opposed to mortgage cover I'll look into this. Having read through everything and spoken to the agent I think I am ok with the policy. Is there a site where people have rated the products / insurance company?

It seems to me you can get customer ratings on retail goods but harder to get customer ratings on finance / insurance products. thank you Zoe

dunstonh

ok thank you. In the meantime I have taken out paymentsheild for about £11 a month.

You went with a payment protection then. What swung you towards that and not proper income protection?

Is there a site where people have rated the products / insurance company?

It seems to me you can get customer ratings on retail goods but harder to get customer ratings on finance / insurance products. thank you Zoe

Many financial services products are regulated and if you start giving ratings and reviews on commercial sites of these products the FSA will start taking an interest to see if you are breaching advice rules. They have already looked at comparison sites a few times on how they list the companies and present the information.

When you buy through execution only or direct offer then there is not meant to be any sort of information that could be considered advice or opinion. If there is then that turns it into advice and the FSA would expect advice requirements to be met. If not, expect a fine, public censure and possibly removal of licence.