Life Insurance

PlatinumConsultant

I currently have a joint decreasing term assurance policy and am looking to replace with a single decreasing term assurance policy. However as I'm now living on my own, hence the policy switch, do I really need the decreasing term policy at all as I'm just on my own? I think I can just get away with a critical illness policy? Is this correct?

InsideInsurance

All depends on your life plans

If you have no kids, no partner and dont expect either of those facts to change then critical illness or income protection etc may be all you need. Who would you be leaving your items/ property to? Do you care if they get it all with an outstanding mortgage on your death?

If you think life may change and you may get a new partner or have kids etc and be more concerned about what estate you leave behind then you may want to consider getting life cover anyway - it may be cheaper to get it now whilst your younger/ fitter than in X years time when you may have developed health conditions or such making you a higher risk

Speak to an IFA or broker and they can discuss options and give indicative pricing

kingstreet

If you have stand-alone critical illness cover but fail to meet the minimum survival period on getting a defined illness, there will be no payout.

If you have combined life and critical illness cover, you may find the premium is actually lower than the stand-alone option and it negates the possibility of the above.

You may be dead, but if you're like me you'd rather someone got the money from the policy, especially if it's cheaper.

PlatinumConsultant

Thanks guys, I'm consulting several sources to see what the general opinion is and, yes, this does include an IFA. Seems like it would be more expensive to do critical on it's own. Due to a medical condition in the family my premiums are pushed up anyway so I've been offered a non-reviewable premium which seems like a good idea. Especially, as pointed out above, the premiums would normally increase by age on a reviewable policy or if I took one out later on.

Initially I thought it seemed like a waste of money but after some research, which included this post, it seems it's better and cheaper to get the Life cover.

OshayAway

PlatinumConsultant wrote: »

Thanks guys, I'm consulting several sources to see what the general opinion is and, yes, this does include an IFA. Seems like it would be more expensive to do critical on it's own. Due to a medical condition in the family my premiums are pushed up anyway so I've been offered a non-reviewable premium which seems like a good idea. Especially, as pointed out above, the premiums would normally increase by age on a reviewable policy or if I took one out later on.

Initially I thought it seemed like a waste of money but after some research, which included this post, it seems it's better and cheaper to get the Life cover.

What's the medical condition?

Also, reviewable plans do not increase based on your own age or any other personal circumstances. To date, most reviewable plans have stayed the same or reduced at review. Although, this obviously could change if there is a big increase in claims globally. If you've been told otherwise, you've been misinformed.

I'm not saying you shouldn't take a guaranteed premium plan which is the safest option but may not necessarily represent the best value depending on the cost difference. It's a common tactic for 'advisers' to demonise reviewable rate plans in order to 'sell up'.