Critical Illness Cover - suggestions?

portoman

Hi, I currently have critical illness cover with Legal and General but I think it's too expensive, but I can't find anywhere else that does separate critical illness cover, as I don't need life insurance, and that seems to come with it when I search. Any suggestions?

dunstonh

but I can't find anywhere else that does separate critical illness cover, as I don't need life insurance, and that seems to come with it when I search. Any suggestions?

Virtually all the providers have the CIC available standalone.    However, its not normally worth doing it as the cost difference between not including life assurance and including it is minimal.  Sometimes pennies or even no difference.

Hi, I currently have critical illness cover with Legal and General

Is that one of their older budget plans (i.e. lower cost, lower coverage plans) or the more recent upgrade in coverage? (you may already be on a low cost option).

Did you buy from a whole of market source or an L&G sales agent? (the latter is usually more expensive).

Weighty1

As Dunstonh says, the cost difference on having standalone critical illness compared to critical illness with life cover is minimal.  In fact, historically L&G, who don't offer standalone critical illness, would still be one of the cheapest options available.
How long have you had the plan in force?  If several years then the cost of it will likely be a good bit more now due to you being older.  As Dunstonh also alludes to, L&G now offer a core and an enhanced proposition.  The enhanced plan WILL be more expensive but it covers nearly 50% more conditions which pay out the full amount and about 30 more conditions which result in a partial payment.  Normally the cost difference to get such a better plan is justified.  

Critical illness should almost never be sold based on cost as the differences between plans can be significant.
Sounds like you should seek some professional advise from a broker rather than trying to do it yourself and potential end up with a very basic plan.

portoman

I can't actually remember how I got to LandG but I'm paying over £30 a month for it and I've had it for over ten years.

portoman

The reason I went for CI was because I didn't think life insurance covers people for illnesses

Sandtree

portoman said:

The reason I went for CI was because I didn't think life insurance covers people for illnesses

I think this alone says that you should go to an advisory protection insurance broker to assess your needs, current coverage and discuss alternatives.

Life insurance (rather than assurance - aka whole of life) pays out if you die before a certain date, some pay if you get given a terminal illness diagnosis with a prognosis of less than 1 year.

CI - pays a lump sum if you get one of a list of conditions to a specified level, some better ones can included a total disablement clause too. However, get something thats not on the list or have a heart condition that doesnt generate the relevant markers in your blood and they dont pay

PHI - provides a salary replacement whilst you are too sick/injured to work irrespective of the cause (exc pre-existing conditions, self harm etc) and will continue paying that money for as long as you are ill until a fixed date (often your 65th birthday or such)

Personally, I think PHI is more important than CI because it gives a true salary replacement which pontentially could keep on going for 30 years. However, there are some that are “lucky” and get a CI payment with a condition that doesnt stop them working long term but the fact it pays off their mortgage or such enables them to make some different life choices.

strawb_shortcake

Sandtree said:

portoman said:

The reason I went for CI was because I didn't think life insurance covers people for illnesses

I think this alone says that you should go to an advisory protection insurance broker to assess your needs, current coverage and discuss alternatives.

Life insurance (rather than assurance - aka whole of life) pays out if you die before a certain date, some pay if you get given a terminal illness diagnosis with a prognosis of less than 1 year.

CI - pays a lump sum if you get one of a list of conditions to a specified level, some better ones can included a total disablement clause too. However, get something thats not on the list or have a heart condition that doesnt generate the relevant markers in your blood and they dont pay

PHI - provides a salary replacement whilst you are too sick/injured to work irrespective of the cause (exc pre-existing conditions, self harm etc) and will continue paying that money for as long as you are ill until a fixed date (often your 65th birthday or such)

Personally, I think PHI is more important than CI because it gives a true salary replacement which pontentially could keep on going for 30 years. However, there are some that are “lucky” and get a CI payment with a condition that doesnt stop them working long term but the fact it pays off their mortgage or such enables them to make some different life choices.

We were in a similar position, my Husband was a stay at home Dad so PHI wouldn't apply.
The CI pay out after his Heart attack was very helpful though, especially as we had only paid in 14 months though we were paying £100 a month. 
We chose not to pay off the mortgage as its quite affordable but we do have a very healthy nest egg, and helps pay for jobs my Husband now struggles with.

portoman

I don't need life insurance as I have no dependents, but critical illness seems to be an add-on for many life policies.

portoman

So PHI is private health insurance? I can't find any like that that covers salaries, only treatments etc.

Sandtree

portoman said:

So PHI is private health insurance? I can't find any like that that covers salaries, only treatments etc.

PHI is Permanent Health Insurance rather than Private Medical Insurance which is what you are thinking of. 

For consumers it is usually sold as “Income Protection’ but the problem is that there are two different products (ASU and PHI) that are both sold under that name and ASU is a budget version that people will also know as PPI whereas PHI is the full fat version. Most notable difference is ASU pays out for a year in most cases whereas PHI pays out until your 65th Birthday no matter how long away that is (or whatever date you set)

fullofcold

annabanana82 said:

Sandtree said:

portoman said:

The reason I went for CI was because I didn't think life insurance covers people for illnesses

I think this alone says that you should go to an advisory protection insurance broker to assess your needs, current coverage and discuss alternatives.

Life insurance (rather than assurance - aka whole of life) pays out if you die before a certain date, some pay if you get given a terminal illness diagnosis with a prognosis of less than 1 year.

CI - pays a lump sum if you get one of a list of conditions to a specified level, some better ones can included a total disablement clause too. However, get something thats not on the list or have a heart condition that doesnt generate the relevant markers in your blood and they dont pay

PHI - provides a salary replacement whilst you are too sick/injured to work irrespective of the cause (exc pre-existing conditions, self harm etc) and will continue paying that money for as long as you are ill until a fixed date (often your 65th birthday or such)

Personally, I think PHI is more important than CI because it gives a true salary replacement which pontentially could keep on going for 30 years. However, there are some that are “lucky” and get a CI payment with a condition that doesnt stop them working long term but the fact it pays off their mortgage or such enables them to make some different life choices.

We were in a similar position, my Husband was a stay at home Dad so PHI wouldn't apply.
The CI pay out after his Heart attack was very helpful though, especially as we had only paid in 14 months though we were paying £100 a month. 
We chose not to pay off the mortgage as its quite affordable but we do have a very healthy nest egg, and helps pay for jobs my Husband now struggles with.

Not true income protection can cover stay at home people, it just depends on the provider and normally comes with a caveat that they will only pay up to x amount per month as most providers now recognise that stay at home parents/house people also have a monthly financial value (cleaning/child care/etc)