Income protection and pre-existing conditions

Weighty1

MyRealNameToo said:

Weighty1 said:

MrHeisenberg said:

MyRealNameToo said:

MrHeisenberg said:

caprikid1 said:

MrHeisenberg said:

caprikid1 said:

You need a very good broker who has access to a good sourcing system. It's a minefield trying to do this without proper advice.

Thanks, hard to know where to start.

Where are you based  ?  I know a few as I work for some brokers in my role

Oh, interesting. I live in Berkshire. Do they need to be fairly local to me?

They dont have to be, we live in London and our protection brokers were based in Exeter.

A good broker is worth their weight in gold, I originally tried an IFA recommended by a charity for my medical condition. They were terrible, they got declines from a couple of insurers and asked me if I wanted them to try others or accept that I am uninsurable. The broker that I tried afterwards said they were confused because one of the declines was from who he'd have said had best chances of success so he spoke to them, not only got the decline reversed but the loading was less than the IFA had said to expect.

PHI can be a bit funny though, they were willing to accept my pre-existing medical condition after letters from my consultant and a meeting with one of their doctors, which I was happy with as you could argue almost anything was related to it but they declined anything to do with ears because I had had a basic inner ear infection 2 years previously (didnt require antibiotics, just left like all the bad sides of being drunk without the good - hadn't even taken a day off sick with it). I took the win rather than fighting it though.  

Sincere thanks, that's very interesting. 

Is there a broker you can recommend? 

Gosh, strange that a minor ear infection can be considered a noteworthy pre-existing medical condition. Seems a bit pedantic.

And this is the nuance of needing more info.  Labyrinthitis is an inner ear infection that has symptoms akin to vertigo, also including hearing loss and tinnitus all of which could be long-term debilitating.  A simple inner ear infection could well have been accepted without any ear exclusion but something like this or Meniere's disease would almost always cause an exclusion of the ears.

Well this is where we get into complexity because inner ear infection generally is the plain English term for labyrinthitis given an "itis" is an infection and the labyrinth is the inner ear made up of the cochlea etc. If it was combined with hearing loss then you may consider vestibular neuritis which is an infection of the auditory nerve. Menieres disease isnt thought to be an infection. 

In my case it was a simple inner ear infection/labyrinthitis, only a single occasion, no tinnitus, fever, hearing loss etc. It had lasted a bit long hence saw the GP but with the inevitable delay between requesting an appointment and actually seeing the GP it had improved considerably so no action was taken/no prescription and told to telephone back in a week if it hadn't cleared up and they'd do a prescription - never happened as it was gone a few days later. 

I thought it was harsh to exclude it, on the basis we had gone from a straight decline to a 25% loading for an unrelated medical condition I didnt push back on the ear exclusion.

I wasn't suggesting that menieres disease is an infection or on the medical definition of labrynthitis, just that 'ear infection' to most people would be assumed to be a simple ear infection of the middle ear, rather than inner, and a middle ear infection would almost always be accepted with no exclusion provided someone had fully recovered at the time of application.

Sounds to me like you may just have been unlucky with the timing of your application.  Without obviously knowing the full details, I'd expect that if you had applied (or reapplied) 12+ months after this ear issue had all settled down that you would have been accepted without the ear exclusion. 

MyRealNameToo

Weighty1 said:

MyRealNameToo said:

Weighty1 said:

MrHeisenberg said:

MyRealNameToo said:

MrHeisenberg said:

caprikid1 said:

MrHeisenberg said:

caprikid1 said:

You need a very good broker who has access to a good sourcing system. It's a minefield trying to do this without proper advice.

Thanks, hard to know where to start.

Where are you based  ?  I know a few as I work for some brokers in my role

Oh, interesting. I live in Berkshire. Do they need to be fairly local to me?

They dont have to be, we live in London and our protection brokers were based in Exeter.

A good broker is worth their weight in gold, I originally tried an IFA recommended by a charity for my medical condition. They were terrible, they got declines from a couple of insurers and asked me if I wanted them to try others or accept that I am uninsurable. The broker that I tried afterwards said they were confused because one of the declines was from who he'd have said had best chances of success so he spoke to them, not only got the decline reversed but the loading was less than the IFA had said to expect.

PHI can be a bit funny though, they were willing to accept my pre-existing medical condition after letters from my consultant and a meeting with one of their doctors, which I was happy with as you could argue almost anything was related to it but they declined anything to do with ears because I had had a basic inner ear infection 2 years previously (didnt require antibiotics, just left like all the bad sides of being drunk without the good - hadn't even taken a day off sick with it). I took the win rather than fighting it though.  

Sincere thanks, that's very interesting. 

Is there a broker you can recommend? 

Gosh, strange that a minor ear infection can be considered a noteworthy pre-existing medical condition. Seems a bit pedantic.

And this is the nuance of needing more info.  Labyrinthitis is an inner ear infection that has symptoms akin to vertigo, also including hearing loss and tinnitus all of which could be long-term debilitating.  A simple inner ear infection could well have been accepted without any ear exclusion but something like this or Meniere's disease would almost always cause an exclusion of the ears.

Well this is where we get into complexity because inner ear infection generally is the plain English term for labyrinthitis given an "itis" is an infection and the labyrinth is the inner ear made up of the cochlea etc. If it was combined with hearing loss then you may consider vestibular neuritis which is an infection of the auditory nerve. Menieres disease isnt thought to be an infection. 

In my case it was a simple inner ear infection/labyrinthitis, only a single occasion, no tinnitus, fever, hearing loss etc. It had lasted a bit long hence saw the GP but with the inevitable delay between requesting an appointment and actually seeing the GP it had improved considerably so no action was taken/no prescription and told to telephone back in a week if it hadn't cleared up and they'd do a prescription - never happened as it was gone a few days later. 

I thought it was harsh to exclude it, on the basis we had gone from a straight decline to a 25% loading for an unrelated medical condition I didnt push back on the ear exclusion.

I wasn't suggesting that menieres disease is an infection or on the medical definition of labrynthitis, just that 'ear infection' to most people would be assumed to be a simple ear infection of the middle ear, rather than inner, and a middle ear infection would almost always be accepted with no exclusion provided someone had fully recovered at the time of application.

Sounds to me like you may just have been unlucky with the timing of your application.  Without obviously knowing the full details, I'd expect that if you had applied (or reapplied) 12+ months after this ear issue had all settled down that you would have been accepted without the ear exclusion. 

Definitely inner ear as its the inner ear is responsible for your sense of balance and that was the only symptom I had of the world spinning which as a consequence means you feel sick as eyes and ears dont match. Hence all the bad points of being drunk. 

Can't say what the gap was between the ear infection and the application, it certainly wasnt several years and sure it was more than a few months but it would be a total guess if it was 6 months, 12 months or 18 months. 

In the 15 years since only had one reoccurrence which only lasted 1-2 weeks and didnt consult a GP on it; probably bad luck or an over zealous underwriter but it was a vast improvement than a flat decline and a smaller loading than the broker had prepared me to anticipate. 

My consultant, for the actual problematic condition, wrote in his opinion that actually well managed version of my condition actually gives me a higher prognosis than someone who doesnt have the condition and therefore rather than declining they should be reducing my premiums... he did fail to mention that mine wasnt well managed but thats why we liked him (until he retired)