Spend or save?

Parsimonia

zygurat789 wrote: »

Policies that you may cash in may pay out on death, so long as they haven't been cashed in.
Steve's policy should not be cashed in if it pays out on death
Possibly they should be talking to the insurance company to see if they can keep the death bit but not the savings bit
This is Steve's life policy shouldn't he be allowed to spend it a bit before he dies?

Not my call to make, but Trudy would probably agree to anything...

The policy may be insuring Steve's life, but it's Trudy that pays the premiums, and he wants to cash it in and spend it....

Seems a bit selfish to me - you'd think he'd want her to have the security after he died. Instead he wants to cash the policy and spend it all.

Trudy I'm pretty sure will be financially OK if he dies...she's got good earning ability, and as I said the house is bought and paid for. I don't think she has a major problem with cashing in the policy and letting him spend it all - she'd give him the sun moon and stars if she could.

Because of that, though, her main concern is how to keep Steve in the lap of luxury if he lives for another 30 years....

pollypenny

Am I alone in thinking that it's strange that a new poster starts two consecutive threads about extremely complex financial problems. ....... And not her own?

moneyistooshorttomention

I don't think its odd.

The only point I have noted is that OP errs rather in seeing the "good" in people to a greater extent than they deserve (ie MIL).

With that, she is obviously aware Trudy's hubbie is selfish and for someone determined to see the good in people (regardless of whether they deserve it or no) to be expressing reservations about Trudy's hubbie leads me to think most of us would be describing him in rather stronger terms than "selfish".

OP strikes me as someone who cares about the people around her being happy. That's all that is striking me and I can be pretty cynical and, indeed, am about what I think about Trudy's hubbie.

I guess its just the way OP operates...whereas others of us (me for instance) will try and drop heavy hints to our friends if we fear for their financial management skills (or lack of...).

Parsimonia

pollypenny wrote: »

Am I alone in thinking that it's strange that a new poster starts two consecutive threads about extremely complex financial problems. ....... And not her own?

I've actually posted quite a few posts about my own complex financial situation, with a hubby who's just lost his benefit appeal etc. I've also posted a lot recently on different boards for advice re how to save on our electricity bills, how to grow our own veggies to save on groceries, and how to cut back on our household expenditure to save money. Our situation and Trudy's are completely different.

I think it's probably because I'm quite open about our financial issues (I don't feel any shame whatsover in telling friends and family that we're having to make significant cutbacks) that other people have opened up to me about their own issues.

Trudy and I have worked together for years and we have many things in common (husbands who have retired on health grounds being the main one) but we also have a lot NOT in common financially (e.g. her husband was successful in his ESA appeal whereas mine wasn't, their house isn't mortgaged and ours is, they don't have the straitened income that we have etc etc etc.....)

That said, I wouldn't swap places with her for all the money in the world....

As for MIL...I don't think ANYONE could make her up.... (though sometimes I certainly wish she was a figment of my imagination!!!) :D:D)

moneyistooshorttomention

I tend to agree with Parsimonia, in that I'm pretty open about my financial problems.

I guess a lot of people aren't because of the discrepancies in amounts of money different people have available.

Maybe, in my case, I feel able to be open about my financial problems because I have quite a tendency to know people with a lot more money than I do and therefore tend to expect them to understand my financial problems.

On the other hand, I'm not in a position (even on the half a low income situation I'm at at present in between retirement age and that darn revised State Pension Age I got caught by) where I am literally counting the pennies that staple foods are going up by.

Maybe some people aren't open about it because of knowing a good number of people on even less than they are and I'm only being open about my problems because the average person I know has a good bit more than I do and, on any objective criteria, its clear I'm currently on totally pathetic income (it would take a "hard" person indeed to disagree that an income is totally pathetic level when its a pensioner concerned and they are on less than Pension Credit level).

Perhaps that's how things go for people generally....ie we are more or less open in accordance with the financial norm of people we know personally and whether our own finances are more or less than that?

whodathunkit

pollypenny wrote: »

Am I alone in thinking that it's strange that a new poster starts two consecutive threads about extremely complex financial problems. ....... And not her own?

You beat me to it!

zygurat789

Parsimonia wrote: »

Not my call to make, but Trudy would probably agree to anything...

The policy may be insuring Steve's life, but it's Trudy that pays the premiums, and he wants to cash it in and spend it....

Seems a bit selfish to me - you'd think he'd want her to have the security after he died. Instead he wants to cash the policy and spend it all.

Trudy I'm pretty sure will be financially OK if he dies...she's got good earning ability, and as I said the house is bought and paid for. I don't think she has a major problem with cashing in the policy and letting him spend it all - she'd give him the sun moon and stars if she could.

Because of that, though, her main concern is how to keep Steve in the lap of luxury if he lives for another 30 years....

There is plenty of cash and near cash available WITHOUT cashing in a savings policy for say £100,000 now when on his death it could be £450,000 which would replace the money he has spent from existing savings.
So he can have his cake and Trudy can eat it later.

zygurat789

pollypenny wrote: »

Am I alone in thinking that it's strange that a new poster starts two consecutive threads about extremely complex financial problems. ....... And not her own?

But it is only your suspictions.
If you probe a problem, as you must to provide any real help, then strange answers may occur.
To date the OP has not been totally forthcoming, suggesting that they are not indeed her personal problems, but that there may be an element of fiction.

Parsimonia

zygurat789 wrote: »

There is plenty of cash and near cash available WITHOUT cashing in a savings policy for say £100,000 now when on his death it could be £450,000 which would replace the money he has spent from existing savings.
So he can have his cake and Trudy can eat it later.

My understanding is that they originally took out such large policies when their children were quite small, in order to provide them with security if the worst happened. I don't think (though I could be wrong) that the motive for the insurance was to provide security for the surviving spouse.

I've never delved too deeply into the motives behind such large sums insured - I suppose I always assumed it was something to do with Steve having lost his parents at such a young age and so unexpectedly....I know they were able to buy the house on the proceeds of the legacy, but I expect (I didn't know them at the time so can't say for sure) that it was a pretty traumatic time for everyone concerned, and I guess I've always assumed that that is why they are so keen on life insurance.

But, as I say, I've never asked Trudy explicitly.

Hubby and I only have life insurance as part of our endowment policy (our mortgage company insisted on it) and only for the borrowed amount, so I have no idea if £900k of insurance costs a lot in terms of premiums or not. I know the cost of our life insurance premiums is wrapped up in our £55pcm endownment premium.

[Actually I've just had a horrid thought!!! Our original mortgage was for £38,950 (we bought our tiny cottage in 1992) and we've since borrowed a further £25k to have an extension built....I don't know if we raised our life insurance amount when borrowed the extra money....would that be a problem? If so, I guess I'd better look into it ASAP!!!]

Incidentally, about 5 years ago I did look into taking out critical illness insurance for myself (it would be financially catastrophic for us if I couldn't work due to illness or accident because I'm the sole breadwinner) but I just couldn't afford it. To add critical illness cover had a ridiculous impact on our premiums - if I recall, it did something like quadruple the premiums or something silly like that! I just need to keep my fingers crossed that I stay healthy!!!:D:D:D

Idiophreak

If it ever gets to the stage where my wife says "you can't retire...I'd rather you kept working so I could buy more shoes/handbags/beauty treatments etc" - we're having a very serious discussion at that point.

Seriously, the guy's led a good life, but has limitted time left. He has a lot of readily saleable assets and a wife that could easily afford to retire and spend the rest of his life (let's be frank) looking after him, which isn't exactly a *great* deal for her anyway...but he'd still rather she kept working?

Stuff that for a game of soldiers!