Income Protection Insurance - Natwest v Scottish Provident

photo_guy

I have currently got a income protection plan with Scottish Provident (self assurance term personal, guaranteed premium).
I pay £35/month (increasing basis so benefits are linked to RPI).
This policy includes accident, sickness & disability premium payment benefit

I recently had a quote from Natwest (Aviva) for £22.73/month (or a further 20% off for life of policy (£18.18) if I take out their regular savings stocks & shares ISA).

Both plans continue until I am 65 and start paying out after 13 consecutive weeks of incapacity.

I'm confused as to what the differences are between the above two policies and whether I would be better off staying where I am, moving to NatWest or finding another policy.

Does anyone know anything about either of these policies and whether they are recommended or not?


I've also got life & CI assurance (via Scottish Equitable) though I'm not sure I need the life bit as my company pension will cover what's left on the mortgage though I was told that although it is possible to get CI separately, there probably wouldn't be much of a cost saving so it's not worth changing.

kingstreet

Is the new quote based on the correct occupation class?

In fact, why not set out the details of the quote and let a few of us see what sounds reasonable;-

Sex
DoB
Smoker
Monthly Benefit
Deferred period - 13 wks?
Payment term - to A65?
Occupation
Guaranteed/renewable rates - Guaranteed?
Level or increasing - RPI linked

Fill in the gaps.

dunstonh

Income protection generally comes in different levels of cover. Whilst not budget, standard or comprehensive, you need to be aware that price is the worst thing you can compare on.

Banks are amongst the most expensive distribution channels (even when using other insurance companies). An IFA would be cheaper offering that Aviva policy than Natwest would.

kingstreet asks the questions needed to make a real decision but my gut says that the Natwest are not comparing like for like. Remember they operate a salesforce with sales targets and have restrictions on cancelling existing products. An IFA doesn't. What should be happening is that the old policy should be compared ot the new one with the pros and cons documented. If that has not happened, then walk away and see a real adviser rather than a sales adviser.

magpiecottage

DunstonH is not allowed to say so but I reckon he could get you a far better Stocks and Shares ISA than NatWest - simply because he is an IFA and any decent IFA could.

Furthermore I don't think he would suggest cheaper income protection is a valid reason for a Stocks and Shares ISA either.

Go and see a real adviser. They will tell you if there is something really better on the market or not.