Income Protection

Insurance_guy

The purpose of this forum is to relay our experiences. It can't have escaped anyone's notice that you are in the Insurance industry and always pushing PHI for all its worth. A case of OshayAway being holier than thou if I've ever seen one.

dunstonh

PHI is far superior to PPI. So, it should be considered before PPI.

The only people who would promote PPI in advance of PHI are salespeople for the companies that offer PPI.

Insurance_guy

Okay if that's the case, please explain how PHI helps anybody who is made redundant.

DigitalJedi

I looked at this a while back and concluded that the policies on offer were very poor value. I was better off putting the money in the bank instead.

dbuk44

Hey there.

Haven't bothered to read up. Get bored when the regulars start hissing at each other

Have a look at https://lvmlp.co.uk/home - 4 defaqto stars.

LV's Mortgage & Lifestyle Protection Plan combines long term Income Protection (sickness & accident) with short term unemployment.

You use the same benefit amount for both events (an upside; normally I have skimped on the unemployment cover because its so expensive) .

The benefit amount can be up to half your monthly income before tax - which answers your opening statement about needing more cover.

The quote tool shows you the numbers; its pretty competitive IMO and premiums are guaranteed.

You'll need a broker to avail.

I used Torquil Clark who were happy to use some of their commission to further reduce my premium.

EDIT: There is also a moratorium on the exclusion period for clients who are replacing their existing unemployment cover

Wutang_2

Insurance_guy wrote: »

Okay if that's the case, please explain how PHI helps anybody who is made redundant.

it doesnt - clue is in the name Permanent Health Insurance!

Wutang_2

Insurance_guy wrote: »

The purpose of this forum is to relay our experiences. It can't have escaped anyone's notice that you are in the Insurance industry and always pushing PHI for all its worth. A case of OshayAway being holier than thou if I've ever seen one.

You do realise that you now sound even more dodgier!

How can someone working in insurance recommending PHI be holier than thou? more like knowledgier than thou...

dunstonh

Insurance_guy wrote: »

Okay if that's the case, please explain how PHI helps anybody who is made redundant.

Please explain how PPI helps anybody who is off work longer than 12 months?

Best advice would either be a standalone "U" plan for the unemployment and a PHI policy for the health or a PPI for the 12 months and a PHI with a 12 month deferment.

Given the awful claim stats on PPI regarding health, I would put the standalone Unemployment plan and PHI is the better quality option.

Insurance_guy

Before the recent down-turn statistics showed that people returned to work on average within the first 3-6 months, so 12 months grace has been sufficient for most workers to get back on their feet. For that 12 months the unemployed person doesn't have to worry how to meet the bills. A thoroughly compelling answer I'd say.

Please can people stop this nonsense of telling visitors to this forum who may be less informed than others, that PHI is superior to PPI. It isn’t. Both are different and both can have their place in good financial planning.

PHI is great if people become long term sick and are unable to work. PPI is great to cover short term sickness and the risks of unemployment. Anyone getting PPI that pays for 12 months and a PHI with a 12 month lead period can likely save a packet on their PHI often halving their PHI premium.

On the subject of Defaqto, it is a good start but premium rates can change at the drop of a hat these days so what's a good price today may not be tomorrow. Also Defaqto charts don't tell consumers everything. As far as I can see it doesn't explain to consumers the significance of initial exclusion periods that can leave them uninsured. These days 150 day initial exclusion periods are the norm for PPI products such as mortgage protection insurance, so if someone is made unemployed within the first 180 days of their cover (150 + qualifying period of 30 days), they get nothing. If the initial exclusion period is for example 60 days as can be found if people look for it online, they CAN be eligible to claim. Price isn't everything, all insurances are not the same.

Time for serious debate and to put this false comparison between PHI and PPI to bed once and for all. Pretty please!

dunstonh

Please can people stop this nonsense of telling visitors to this forum who may be less informed than others, that PHI is superior to PPI. It isn’t.

It is.

You have a vested interest in PPI and you are letting it cloud your judgement. The others responding on this thread have no vested in interest in any of the product types.

Both are different and both can have their place in good financial planning.

There are some differences but there is an awful lot of overlap.

PPI is great to cover short term sickness and the risks of unemployment.

Its so great that almost 85% of PPI claims are rejected whereas PHI claims are paid out typically in excess of 90% of claims. The biggest reason for this has to be the fact that PHI is underwritten at point of sale whereas PPI is effectively underwritten at point of claim. Therefore allowing rejections on things that would have been picked up on a PHI application from the start and could have been included potentially.

Yes, PPI has its place but would you rather a product that pays out in excess of 90% of claims or a product that only pays out in 15% of claims?