Medical Condition Travel Insurance

pangit58

I have a travel insurance policy with my bank account which covers myself and my wife. However, there is an additional premium for a pre-existing medical condition I have. I have been looking around at options, and have now got many quotes for travel insurance to cover my condition. However, all of the quotes are full policies, and not just for the pre-existing condition. Is there such a thing as an "add on" policy where I use the bank policy for everything except my pre-existing condition. Seems silly to have to pay for double cover just to get the pre-existing condition covered. The additional charge from the bank is not the most "reasonable" quote !!!

TELLIT01

It would seem unlikely than any insurer would want to take on the high risk elements of a policy only i.e. pre-existing conditions without the premium being extremely high.  What is the comparative cost of the bank top up and the seperate policy.

eskbanker

pangit58 said:

I have a travel insurance policy with my bank account which covers myself and my wife. However, there is an additional premium for a pre-existing medical condition I have. I have been looking around at options, and have now got many quotes for travel insurance to cover my condition. However, all of the quotes are full policies, and not just for the pre-existing condition. Is there such a thing as an "add on" policy where I use the bank policy for everything except my pre-existing condition. Seems silly to have to pay for double cover just to get the pre-existing condition covered. The additional charge from the bank is not the most "reasonable" quote !!!

No, a pre-existing condition isn't actually a separate insurable risk as such, it's just a potential factor that could affect claims in other areas, so, for example, it may increase the chances of medical attention or repatriation when away.  In other words, it needs to be handled as an additional premium priced on to a policy that already insures against medical attention, etc, rather than a standalone policy in its own right, so you either pay the extra with your bank policy or you buy a whole policy elsewhere, perhaps ditching the packaged bank account to avoid double-dipping if it's no longer cost-effective for your needs.

Sandtree

TELLIT01 said:

It would seem unlikely than any insurer would want to take on the high risk elements of a policy only i.e. pre-existing conditions without the premium being extremely high.  What is the comparative cost of the bank top up and the seperate policy.

Why would it be higher for pre-existing conditions only -v- a full policy inc the same pre-existing conditions? The problem is more the reverse, that there would be so minimal differences in price once you also removing Marketing/Setup etc that there'd be no difference in premium.

TELLIT01

Because the potential for problems with pre-existing conditions may be perceived as a higher risk.  If somebody is only trying to insure heart problems following a heart attack they aren't exactly a 'good' risk.

Vegastare

Couple years back I encountered similar with travel insurance linked to home/house insurance. I was not covered due to age. Ending up going with new policy for trip just for me.
OH insisted that I was also covered via his bank account....but it was the same 
Also found out that about six months hence I would not be covered as too old at 65 for either of the policies.

Sandtree

TELLIT01 said:

Because the potential for problems with pre-existing conditions may be perceived as a higher risk.  If somebody is only trying to insure heart problems following a heart attack they aren't exactly a 'good' risk.

And so you charge £200 rather than £20 but how is that different if they offer a full policy inc the heart condition for £200 or charge £195 and cover only the heart condition?

It wouldn't work for the OP as the reduction for it not being a full policy would be less than the £20 cost of the accompany standalone policy because both have to pay advertising costs, system costs, commissions etc but still not getting why you think end to end cover is lower risk than condition only cover?

There could be some element of negative selection but that already exists if they are one of the few insurers to cover recent heart attack suffers