Becoming a smoker shortly before buying annuity

Goldiegirl

bowlhead99 wrote: »

Hmm, if I microwave my balls every evening, can I get cheaper life insurance because I'm more likely to die of cancer? If so, where do I sign.

Oh, err, wait...

It probably wouldn't make any difference - I've never yet seen an insurance application form with the question

'Do you microwave your balls each morning' y/n

As they don't ask the question, they don't perceive microwaved balls as a significant risk!! :rotfl:

Paul_Herring

bmm78 wrote: »

... and were rumbled following a cotinine test.

Weren't they eating enough potatoes, tomatoes or aubergines?

saver861

Goldiegirl wrote: »

It probably wouldn't make any difference - I've never yet seen an insurance application form with the question

'Do you microwave your balls each morning' y/n

As they don't ask the question, they don't perceive microwaved balls as a significant risk!! :rotfl:

What about frying them instead of microwaving them?

Would frying them increase the risk I wonder?

atush

Even if you could do as you propose, the cost of the cigarettes would far outweigh the enhanced annuity you would gain.

AS a non smoker, I can only assume you dont know the cost of a packet?

saver861

atush wrote: »

Even if you could do as you propose, the cost of the cigarettes would far outweigh the enhanced annuity you would gain.

AS a non smoker, I can only assume you dont know the cost of a packet?

The OP's knowledge of the cost of a packet would seem to be the least of his concerns when it comes to knowledge .....

As for common sense ..... mannnnnnnn

grey_gym_sock

atush wrote: »

AS a non smoker, I can only assume you dont know the cost of a packet?

perhaps the OP buys them so (s)he can formulate plans on the back

Malthusian

Stop dumping on the OP, it's a perfectly reasonable train of thought - even though that train inevitably comes to the conclusion that it won't work.

If you really want to beat The Man, take up running and do the crossword every day. (Other physical and mental exercises are available.) Simply giving yourself an above average life expectancy means you will be achieving the same thing the OP is aiming at, without the risk of reducing your lifespan, or defrauding the insurer, at trivial cost.

(For the purpose of the thought exercise, I am leaving aside the fact that annuities are often terrible value regardless of your life expectancy.)

PensionTech

Used to do some analysis on this - using annuity comparison calculators, it seemed that one of the best ways to increase the value of your annuity was to move house. An annuity for a Liverpool inhabitant might be 20% cheaper than an annuity for a Surrey inhabitant. As far as I know there aren't any questions about how long you've lived at that address - but the IFAs on here may well know more about that than I do. But is it worth any of this? Almost certainly not.

As for smoking, yes you will usually have to say that you have had a pretty serious habit for a reasonable length of time. So take up smoking for ten years if you want but it's not a smart financial decision. And I don't understand the argument that "something else is likely to get you before the lung cancer". This sounds like people who say that they can't be bothered to live healthily because "who wants to live to 90 anyway". The point is that a lifestyle like this doesn't just change your life expectancy - you don't live happily and healthily to 75 and then cleanly drop dead before all of that annoying old age kicks in - it changes your physical health. You deteriorate faster and earlier. When you're 70 and running out of breath on the stairs, hacking up phlegm, having disturbed sleep and high blood pressure, putting on weight, becoming more and more house-bound, and your wife/friends are still active enough to enjoy their retirement - will you think it's clever then?

Malthusian's idea is much better. Beat the system by outliving their expectations and enjoying your retirement with a functioning body.

grey_gym_sock

does the same definition of being a smoker apply when taking out life insurance? i.e. can you legitimately pay the (lower) premiums for non-smokers, despite smoking the very occasional cigar?

Malthusian

does the same definition of being a smoker apply when taking out life insurance? i.e. can you legitimately pay the (lower) premiums for non-smokers, despite smoking the very occasional cigar?

Would it shock you to learn that insurers are not entirely consistent and the inconsistency is in their favour?

The question generally used for life insurance application forms is "Have you smoked any tobacco products over the last 12 months". They will later ask for more detail about how much you smoke if any. It's possible that the very occasional cigar would not result in an increased premium but that would be a question for an insurance actuary. You would certainly still have to disclose it.