Hubby retiring, reviewing the budget...

barginunter

bouncydog1 wrote: »

I would either keep the existing policy going ( what is the amount paid out on death) or not bother.

We've been paying £116+ per month for £147K cover (cover has reduced a bit over the years). They now say to maintain this cover, we need to pay £247 per month! If we remain paying £116, cover drops to £76K. I can get term insurance for £76k for a lot less.
I think they can go forth and multiply.

missile

Wow that is a lot of money you have paid over the years. No doubt a financial consultant (a thief in a suit my wife calls them) got a fat commission for selling you that policy?

Life insurance may be essential for those who have dependents but for many of us it is a luxury we do not need / can ill afford.

SevenOfNine

Same financial situation as you, but have 2 grown up sons. Decided to let current insurance end when it's supposed to (now for him, later for me). Won't be taking out whole life policy - no need.

If both kark it together, sons are already financially independent and would inherit more than enough to make them so if they weren't.

Have enough pension income to live on & would downsize home to free up more if necessary, though like you, my state pension is held by the Government like a carrot dangling on the end of a stick!

Better to think about suitable Wills I think. We set up nil rate band discretionary trusts within our Wills some years ago. Not required for some time as a way of limiting IHT (for our sons I mean - not husband/wife) but still serve a purpose if either surviving spouse A) remarries or needs means tested care.

More important to think about that (unless you already have of course) IMO.

Bollotom

Buy a funeral bond from the Co-op. Todays prices for tomorrows funeral. For £247 a month I'd want to be buried alongside Elvis or in a brewery!

jamesd

I think that you have no need for life insurance or life assurance. You no longer have dependants and your financial resources appear likely to be sufficient, though we don't actually know what you need to live on if one of you was to die.

pollypenny

We have worked out that the survivor would be fine, although I'd be better off, than he would.

I'd get half of OH's occupational pension. He won't get half of mine, though, as women teachers, police officers etc could only pass on 2% up until 1987.

jamesd

Rather than life insurance what you might do is have him defer claiming the state pensions. The amount paid will be increased by 10.4% for each year of deferral, pro-rated for shorter periods. One to three years is likely to be good for men in good health, going beyond that it's more of an insurance for long life situation, which is what might be useful here.

If he hasn't taken his work pension yet it's also asking what happens if he doesn't take it as early as possible. Sometimes the amount paid can increase usefully.

You'll reach state pension age after the proposed introduction date for the flat rate state pension and the increase from deferring, if any, hasn't yet been set for you. No way yet to consider whether it'll be good under the rules for you, other than it looks unlikely to be as clearly good as it is under current rules for those in good health.

You mention £200,000 saved. Is that in savings accounts or invested? For long term things like retirement income it's generally good to have much invested rather than in savings accounts. The reason is the sustainable income level, which is a lot higher from investments than savings. In your situation what that would do is increase the likely amount you both and eventually either of you alone would have to live on and that would ultimately be available for inheritance.