FTB life insurance

changingstars

Hi

I was just after some advice on life insurance. I am in the process of buying my first home, I am a 26year old, non smoker, healthy and no dependants. Would it be better just to get standard life insurance? Or is it wise to get critical illness and income protection?

To be honest i never thought of all this until it was mentioned during my mortgage application. I've been quoted £40+ a month for everything which seems a lot of money but have seen i can just get life insurance on it's on for as little as £6 a month. I know it's good to be prepared but am kind of leaning towards just the life insurance until i am married with children etc.

Thanks for any advice on this and sorry if it's a stupid question but am new to all this.

Cat2011

If no one is going to be financially disadvantaged if you die (i.e. no wife/children/dependents), then I wouldn't bother with life insurance.

Critical illness and/or income protection might be worth it, depending on your job security. If you are self-employed (not sure if they can easily get the insurance??) or you think you might be at risk of redundancies or unstable employment then worth a think. But if you are in stable, secure employment with good sick leave pay, then it's not necessary.

Either way, I'd just choose to "self-insure". Put aside some money each month, until you have sufficient to pay at least 6 months of essential outgoings. Then leave it until you need it. It'll probably cost you a lot less.

dunstonh

Would it be better just to get standard life insurance? Or is it wise to get critical illness and income protection?

All three is the ideal solution providing you have the financial need for all three.

I've been quoted £40+ a month for everything which seems a lot of money

£40 is nothing for all three (providing the income protection is proper income protection and not PPI)

but have seen i can just get life insurance on it's on for as little as £6 a month.

And what use will that do for you if you are unable to work due to illness?
CI and PHI have higher pay out rates than life assurance. So, why are you picking life assurance? Especially, as it sounds you may not even have a financial need for life assurance.

Weighty1

Cat2011 wrote: »

IEither way, I'd just choose to "self-insure". Put aside some money each month, until you have sufficient to pay at least 6 months of essential outgoings. Then leave it until you need it. It'll probably cost you a lot less.

And what happens if the injury illness keeps you or the OP off work for 2-years? Who's paying the mortgage, council tax, gas, leccy, for food, water, Sky tv, then?

It's impossible to self insure to that degree if you are solely reliant on your own standard of living.

I'd suggest Income Protection should be the option first looked at as this guarantees an ongoing income for almost any cause of incapacity. Critical Illness is more of a luxury purchase in my mind, although there are scenarios where you could have the mortgage repaid and be back to work within a few months. Depends whether you just want protecting or whether you are looking for a lottery win type scenario?

Aretnap

If you are unmarried and have no children then it's not obvious why you need life insurance, let alone why you seem to think it's higher priority than critical illness/income protection. The usual reason you buy life insurance is so that people who depend on your salary for their wellbeing (eg spouse, children) aren't left wanting if you die early. It's a product that you'll never benefit from personally (because if you ever claim on it you'll be dead) - so whose benefit would you be paying £6/month for?

Income protection and critical illness cover are there to protect you and as a single person I would prioritise them (especially income protection) over life insurance. If you get a serious injury/illness which stops you from working for many years then having 70% of your salary still coming in every month would make a massive difference to your standard of living - dependants or no dependants.