Insurances

[nobulltiger]

I wish companies took notice of personal opinion!

Same, that way they would be doing the right thing by people for once

 

[Nothing]

How is it any of their business?? I ruddy hate Insurance. I have Income Protection and I'm too scared to visit the Doctor, because whenever you renew you feel guilty answering their questions about why, what, when, why??? Its easier to just not go. Most blokes I know who have had Income Protection have been denied it when they needed it anyway, or have had it reduced significantly. Happy to take the premiums though..

Income Protection (at least any decent policy) should be automatically renewing without need for further medical tests or questionaires. Once insured, most decent Income Protection policies (by most reputable insurers) are guaranteed insurability.Further, if they are being denied a claim at a decent insurer then they either:
1. Have lied on their application for insurance (so you said your occupation is a typist, yet you appear to have worked with exposives for the last 4 years)
2. Failed to disclose something relevant (yes you need to disclose that your hobby is having knife fights with Rhinos)
3. Don't actually have a valid claim (losing your job because you were pissed at work is not a valid claim).

I know a bloke who has been off work for 12 months and will likely be off work for another 12 with a serious ankle injury. He is being paid $6K a month and full rehab costs until he can return to work.

 

[Pedro]

Income Protection (at least any decent policy) should be automatically renewing without need for further medical tests or questionaires. Once insured, most decent Income Protection policies (by most reputable insurers) are guaranteed insurability.Further, if they are being denied a claim at a decent insurer then they either:
1. Have lied on their application for insurance (so you said your occupation is a typist, yet you appear to have worked with exposives for the last 4 years)
2. Failed to disclose something relevant (yes you need to disclose that your hobby is having knife fights with Rhinos)
3. Don't actually have a valid claim (losing your job because you were pissed at work is not a valid claim).

I know a bloke who has been off work for 12 months and will likely be off work for another 12 with a serious ankle injury. He is being paid $6K a month and full rehab costs until he can return to work.

Over the past 10-12 years or so, my broker has changed the policies between various companies a few times. This is where the Doctors visits become relevant.

An example - For no real reason I went and had my eyes tested. Missus was bugging me to do it. Anyway, Eye guy says there is a strange spot behing my eye. Sends me to have an angiogram. Yes, there is something there. I then get bounced around having MRI scans on my brain, spine and adbomen. Then another brain scan. End result - Nothing. All clear. Next time I did my income protection and mentioned this (so as not to lie), my eyes are excluded. I am now very careful and selective about going to the quacks, thats all. Touch wood, I've never had cause to claim on it myself.

I did however work with another Builder who broke his back on site one day after a tumble. He had been paying premiums based on a certain level of income/protection for years. Anyway, previous year was not so good. After consistent years earning big dough, he had a year where he dived a bit. End result, company will only pay out based on his shit year. Just not fair.

 

[Nothing]

Over the past 10-12 years or so, my broker has changed the policies between various companies a few times. This is where the Doctors visits become relevant.

An example - For no real reason I went and had my eyes tested. Missus was bugging me to do it. Anyway, Eye guy says there is a strange spot behing my eye. Sends me to have an angiogram. Yes, there is something there. I then get bounced around having MRI scans on my brain, spine and adbomen. Then another brain scan. End result - Nothing. All clear. Next time I did my income protection and mentioned this (so as not to lie), my eyes are excluded. I am now very careful and selective about going to the quacks, thats all. Touch wood, I've never had cause to claim on it myself.

I did however work with another Builder who broke his back on site one day after a tumble. He had been paying premiums based on a certain level of income/protection for years. Anyway, previous year was not so good. After consistent years earning big dough, he had a year where he dived a bit. End result, company will only pay out based on his shit year. Just not fair.

Thanks for some examples to further refute!
1. Your broker is churning. It's unethical and he could/should lose his AFSL license or Representative status. He has actually made YOUR situation worse by his advice, if you wanted you could take your case to the Financial Ombudsman and seek compensation.
If you kept the policy that did not have the exclusion (the year before your tests) then you would not need further tests and your eyes would be covered until you stopped paying premiums or finished work. I hope the broker pays you some of the massive commissions he has bene generating doing all this churning, because it's you who has lost as a result.
2. The builder could have covered against his income downturn. He has an indemnity policy which is designed to do exactly as you have stated. They are great for regular employees who's income doesn't vary greatly. As a self employed person (or anyone who's income varies greatly), if he had taken out an Agreed value policy then (with evidence) you can protect your income at an agreed level. Of course, these policies cost more so either the builder or his broker decided that it wasn't worth it. If it was the builder, then that's his choice that he now has to live with, if it was a broker then he should be going to the broker asking why he recommnded that cover.

 

[Pedro]

Thanks for some examples to further refute!
1. Your broker is churning. It's unethical and he could/should lose his AFSL license or Representative status. He has actually made YOUR situation worse by his advice, if you wanted you could take your case to the Financial Ombudsman and seek compensation.
If you kept the policy that did not have the exclusion (the year before your tests) then you would not need further tests and your eyes would be covered until you stopped paying premiums or finished work. I hope the broker pays you some of the massive commissions he has bene generating doing all this churning, because it's you who has lost as a result.

Geez, dunno if churning is quite right. I would assume that it isn't such a bad thing to look for better deals once every few years. My current deal is with One Path. Has been for approx 3 years. The catalyst for changing at that time was a change in circumstances for us. ie Moved house, extra mortgage etc (The exclusion was on a previous policy, so in a sense he probably did the right thing)

You are obviously an Insurance guy, so whats your thoughts on whats appropriate? How often should you have a look at whats out there? My current policy, which has Income Protection, Trauma (me and Mrs), and life (again me & mrs), increases in premiums on its anniversary, as well as protections levels. I assume thats normal for most policies. As someone who can't be stuffed chasing prices around for this sort of stuff myself, how often is right? As I say, a few times in 12 years =3 for me. Once evry 4 years on average. I wouldn't have thought that excessive myself.

 

[Nothing]

Geez, dunno if churning is quite right. I would assume that it isn't such a bad thing to look for better deals once every few years. My current deal is with One Path. Has been for approx 3 years. The catalyst for changing at that time was a change in circumstances for us. ie Moved house, extra mortgage etc (The exclusion was on a previous policy, so in a sense he probably did the right thing)

You are obviously an Insurance guy, so whats your thoughts on whats appropriate? How often should you have a look at whats out there? My current policy, which has Income Protection, Trauma (me and Mrs), and life (again me & mrs), increases in premiums on its anniversary, as well as protections levels. I assume thats normal for most policies. As someone who can't be stuffed chasing prices around for this sort of stuff myself, how often is right? As I say, a few times in 12 years =3 for me. Once evry 4 years on average. I wouldn't have thought that excessive myself.

I'm more of a dotting i and crossing t's type of guy than an insurance guy. But it is fair to say, I know a bit about this.

If he has recommended a policy that he made your situation worse (he may have rectified that with the next policy) that is churning and a pretty big issue across the industry. Reducing premiums but adding an exclusion is not making your situation better. Having said that, I did get the impression that you were being moved more than 3 times in 12 years. That would be about right, though often a change of PRODUCT rather than a review of existing is about the broker restarting commissions. Why didn't he just increase the cover within the existing product? Usually changes need to be made at big life events (marriage, divorce, home loan, kids) which it sounds like you have done.

Bringing all this back to your original point (not going to Docs because of the paperwork), the issue is that because of poor advice regarding changing policies (at the time) you are now taking increased risks (not visiting Docs) which is a worse outcome for the insurer. That is not the insurers fault but a fault with the broker who is gaming the system. The insurer now has less revenue (because of increased commissions to the broker) and more potential for payouts (you being higher risk to insure). The net result of that is insurance commissions will increase for everyone.

I am a massive advocate of insurance, particularly income protection and whilst it can be a hassle to jump through the hoops to get the cover, it is better than the alternative. Good work on having the cover (a lot don't), ask questions of your broker and don't change products in the future unless there is a benefit to you.

 

[Scotland]

It shouldn't matter for health insurance, but car insurance premiums are calculated based on where you live so vary from suburb to suburb let alone state to state.