income protection quote..is it reasonable?

sam1970

i have been looking for income protection policy to complement my life policy as i do not believe in CI policies. I have been quoted £62/month for a benefit of £662/week after 52 weeks deferment until age of 60. is this reasonable quote. I am 39 years old with no major health issues.

yelf

you're far more likely to need CI than a life policy.
Yes its reasonable.

dunstonh

Reasonable will depend on what level of cover you have gone for. Is it comprehensive or budget? What occupation class? Smoker status?

sam1970

thanks for the replies...I never smoked and the policy is specific for my occupation i.e it will pay if i cant do my job rather than any job. Yelf...why do you think that I will need CI more than life policy?

Wutang_2

sam1970 wrote: »

Yelf...why do you think that I will need CI more than life policy?

Probably because there is (statistically) more chance of contracting a critical illness than dying at your age - although granted, it is a bit pricier (usually about 4 times as much as life cover).

sam1970

Wutang wrote: »

Probably because there is (statistically) more chance of contracting a critical illness than dying at your age - although granted, it is a bit pricier (usually about 4 times as much as life cover).

but again there is statistically more chance of a life policy to pay than CI policy.

Wutang_2

sam1970 wrote: »

but again there is statistically more chance of a life policy to pay than CI policy.

I was unaware of this new stat - but if thats the way you feel then don't bother.

(also, you're wrong)

sam1970

Wutang wrote: »

I was unaware of this new stat - but if thats the way you feel then don't bother.

(also, you're wrong)

If I die the insurer will have to pay..there is no question about life and death but with CI the list of conditions is limited and the insurer will try every trick in the book not to pay....there was a case on BBC watchdog couple of years ago when insurer refused a claim for a 36 years old poor guy who had testicular cancer and the reason was that he had a kidney infection at age of 4 and he did not declare it when he took the policy....now tell me how on earth will you remember an infection you had as a child? and how this infection will increase your risk of testicular cancer???? by the way I am a hospital doctor so although I am not insurance expert I know few things about medical conditions.

lisyloo

I was unaware of this new stat - but if thats the way you feel then don't bother.
(also, you're wrong)

HI Wutang,

I'm not an expert and don't have statistical information, but I've certainly heard that life insurers do not tend to dispute whether you are alive or dead.
Of course there will be a tiny minority of cases where someone goes missing, but usually it's pretty clear whwther someone is dead or alive.

On the other hand I've certainly heard of cases (on here as well as on TV) where insurers will not pay out for CI.
One reason is that you haven't declared a pre-exising condition.
One well publicised case was where a man had not declared a family illness, this was because he did not know about it.

I'm certainly not saying the insurance is not worthwhile, but certainly the public perception from media is that there can be dipsputes over payouts with CI but this rarely happens with life insurance.

Personally I see income protection as more valuatble because I see an income as better than a lump sum and my requirement would be to be paid if I lost my income (couldn't work) rather than got a specific illness. You could get an uninsured illness and not be able to work or get an insured one and still be able to work.
In an ideal world we'd have everything, but in the real world, most of us have to chose and I'd go for he income protection every time.

dunstonh

there was a case on BBC watchdog couple of years ago when insurer refused a claim for a 36 years old poor guy who had testicular cancer and the reason was that he had a kidney infection at age of 4 and he did not declare it when he took the policy....now tell me how on earth will you remember an infection you had as a child?

Watchdog also got their knuckles rapped over their misrepresentation on their reporting of CI cover and the FOS even had to correct a number of the things said.

The FOS have published guidelines on non-disclosure and since then its become much clearer on what should and shouldnt happen when its unintentional or intentional non disclosure.

Just this week it was announced that complaints on CI cover have dropped significantly but income protection complaints have increased. Although that didnt say what the split was between PHI and PPI versions. I suspect it is PPI has sky rocketed and PHI has been much the same or fallen.

now tell me how on earth will you remember an infection you had as a child? and how this infection will increase your risk of testicular cancer???? by the way I am a hospital doctor so although I am not insurance expert I know few things about medical conditions.

Its not about whether its linked but how the risk was priced and if they would have taken on the risk in the first place. If you buy insurance it is priced on the risks the insurer believes they are taking. If you misrepresent the risks then you are effectively defrauding the insurance company.

Wutang_2

All I am saying is that if you die - life insurance pays out. If also, you are diagnosed with one of the defined illness of the critical illness policy, it will pay out.

The grey area usually stems from those who do not know what they are covered for.