Getting started with insurance

[boredboiboi]

Is DPS worth or should I opt out..?

Depends on your age, with the same premium, u can get higher coverage on the private insurance.

 

[James Lee WY]

heres some useful links i looked at for term life insurance..

https://www.policypal.com/blog/insurance/best-term-life-plans-in-singapore/
https://blog.seedly.sg/term-life-insurance-singapore

So I read all the links but I'm still quite lost. Would you still opt to get it if u are a 30years old male non smoker and equiped with all the necessary insurance like careshield, CI, Whole life and all?

btw I also heard that DPS is good after reading the PolicyPal website but I'm am unsure

 

[Mr. Wood]

So I read all the links but I'm still quite lost. Would you still opt to get it if u are a 30years old male non smoker and equiped with all the necessary insurance like careshield, CI, Whole life and all?

btw I also heard that DPS is good after reading the PolicyPal website but I'm am unsure

DPS - dependent protection scheme
if u no dependents, dun need. seriously, the sum assured is so low dat it probably covers funeral expenses. and 1-2 weeks living expenses for the family.
and it pays out only in death. means bed ridden cannot claim. hand break leg break cannot claim. langgar car cannot work cannot claim.

so bottom line, wht is yr concern and wht u hope to achieve?

 

[BBCWatcher]

seriously, the sum assured is so low dat it probably covers funeral expenses. and 1-2 weeks living expenses for the family.

It’s more than that for most families. The payout is $46,000.

and it pays out only in death. means bed ridden cannot claim. hand break leg break cannot claim. langgar car cannot work cannot claim.

It’s not only death. The DPS also allows Terminal Illness and Total and Permanent Disability claims. It’s really just standard term life insurance to age 60, but premiums can be paid with CPF dollars, a feature some people appreciate.

 

[Aresden]

DPS - dependent protection scheme
if u no dependents, dun need. seriously, the sum assured is so low dat it probably covers funeral expenses. and 1-2 weeks living expenses for the family.
and it pays out only in death. means bed ridden cannot claim. hand break leg break cannot claim. langgar car cannot work cannot claim.

so bottom line, wht is yr concern and wht u hope to achieve?

DPS covers death, Terminal Illness or Total Permanent Disability.
On the other hand, I think it is affordable and definitely worth getting.

Source : https://www.greateasternlife.com/sg...-servicing.html#dependantsprotectionschemedps

 

[Mr. Wood]

It’s more than that for most families. The payout is $46,000.

my bad
meant to say 1-2yrs.
my point is if family is dual income, and one passes on it may be take a toll on the surviving spouse.

 

[majora]

Would like to check with you guys here.

Is it a 'rule of thumb' to always have the insurance coverage payout of 10x your salary?

I have a lifeplan (PruLife) which started around 4 years ago. The same agent did a review recently and told me that my insurance coverage should be 10x of my pay, and eventually urged me to sign up for a term plan in order to 'top up' my coverage in order to achieve the requirement above.

With both plans running concurrently, it cost around $225 per month, and I began to question is it really necessary. Does 'risk level' play a part here? I don't drink or smoke, work in office but I don't drive. Got married recently but no kids yet.

Would appreciate any comments regarding me holding both term and life plan just to meet the 10x salary coverage payout. Thanks.

 

[BBCWatcher]

Is it a 'rule of thumb' to always have the insurance coverage payout of 10x your salary?

It’s a rule of thumb, but it’s not a very good one.

Does 'risk level' play a part here? I don't drink or smoke, work in office but I don't drive. Got married recently but no kids yet.

Not really, no. Less risk doesn’t mean no risk. In terms of sum assured, you apparently currently have one potential dependent, your spouse. (Anyone else?) Some spouses are hugely dependent, some not at all, and others in between.

 

[majora]

It’s a rule of thumb, but it’s not a very good one.


Not really, no. Less risk doesn’t mean no risk. In terms of sum assured, you apparently currently have one potential dependent, your spouse. (Anyone else?) Some spouses are hugely dependent, some not at all, and others in between.

Not really, no. Less risk doesn’t mean no risk. In terms of sum assured, you apparently currently have one potential dependent, your spouse. (Anyone else?) Some spouses are hugely dependent, some not at all, and others in between.[/QUOTE]

Other than my spouse (whom I don't think she is a huge dependent), the others are my parents which both of them are not working.

 

[boredboiboi]

Would like to check with you guys here.

Is it a 'rule of thumb' to always have the insurance coverage payout of 10x your salary?

I have a lifeplan (PruLife) which started around 4 years ago. The same agent did a review recently and told me that my insurance coverage should be 10x of my pay, and eventually urged me to sign up for a term plan in order to 'top up' my coverage in order to achieve the requirement above.

With both plans running concurrently, it cost around $225 per month, and I began to question is it really necessary. Does 'risk level' play a part here? I don't drink or smoke, work in office but I don't drive. Got married recently but no kids yet.

Would appreciate any comments regarding me holding both term and life plan just to meet the 10x salary coverage payout. Thanks.

Rule of thumb depends on the dependents you have and how much they actually need should anything happens to u. Rule of thumb is just a guide.
U can even review if its better to keep the wholelife or change it with other better option if there or totally change it to a term.

 

[BBCWatcher]

Other than my spouse (whom I don't think she is a huge dependent), the others are my parents which both of them are not working.

It doesn’t matter if they’re not working. It matters if they are genuinely dependent on you. If they’re reliably set for life already (in basic, dignified lifestyle terms), they’re not your dependents.

 

[xtwis7]

It’s not wrong if someone wishes to provide a living standard above the bare minimum for their parents. While they can get on by simply, most children would always want to repay their parents for looking after them by giving them a better life when they are around so passing away earlier should also be no different.

It doesn’t matter if they’re not working. It matters if they are genuinely dependent on you. If they’re reliably set for life already (in basic, dignified lifestyle terms), they’re not your dependents.

 

[winthony]

Would like to check with you guys here.

Is it a 'rule of thumb' to always have the insurance coverage payout of 10x your salary?

I have a lifeplan (PruLife) which started around 4 years ago. The same agent did a review recently and told me that my insurance coverage should be 10x of my pay, and eventually urged me to sign up for a term plan in order to 'top up' my coverage in order to achieve the requirement above.

With both plans running concurrently, it cost around $225 per month, and I began to question is it really necessary. Does 'risk level' play a part here? I don't drink or smoke, work in office but I don't drive. Got married recently but no kids yet.

Would appreciate any comments regarding me holding both term and life plan just to meet the 10x salary coverage payout. Thanks.

Is it a 'rule of thumb' to always have the insurance coverage payout of 10x your salary?

Not always! you have to evaluate the proposal made by your adviser if it is sound financially and necessary or not.

I began to question is it really necessary. Does 'risk level' play a part here? I don't drink or smoke, work in office but I don't drive. Got married recently but no kids yet.

Would appreciate any comments regarding me holding both term and life plan just to meet the 10x salary coverage payout. Thanks.

Risk definitely plays a part in how "likely" one would be met with a premature death / diagnosis of illnesses. That being said, its not within our control and thus there is this element of insurance introduced to give you some form of "safety net" in those event whereby you get a output drastically greater than your input.

If financially you are not able to continue this arrangement of both term and life, you might want to have a sit down and restructure your portfolio to make sure it
1) fits your protection needs
2) fits your budget

 

[ranchfarm]

I'm looking for insurance advice for my kins:
1) 67-year-old parents with only Medishield Life. Mother recovered from liver cancer 6 years ago.
Would NTUC Incomeshield Enhanced C be good for them?
2) 6-year-old nephew who contracted lymphoma but is considered to be in full remission. He has no insurance coverage.
What insurance would be good for him?

 

[winthony]

I'm looking for insurance advice for my kins:
1) 67-year-old parents with only Medishield Life. Mother recovered from liver cancer 6 years ago.
Would NTUC Incomeshield Enhanced C be good for them?
2) 6-year-old nephew who contracted lymphoma but is considered to be in full remission. He has no insurance coverage.
What insurance would be good for him?

Based on the medical history, it would be an uphill climb to be frank. Insurers may reject or even imposed exclusions.

Insurers like AXA have products that are targeted for cancer remission individuals so you might want to check that out

 

[BBCWatcher]

It’s not wrong if someone wishes to provide a living standard above the bare minimum for their parents.

First of all, I didn't write "bare minimum." I wrote "basic, dignified lifestyle." You and your loved ones define the words I actually used.

Second, if you want to exceed this threshold (as you determine it), of course you can, if you wish. That doesn't mean if your loved ones can meet or exceed the lifestyle threshold that they are your dependents, nor does it mean that insurance coverage in excess of the threshold is a necessity. It's a "nice to have," and (broadly speaking) I think spending money on "nice to haves" is wonderful, assuming you're taking care of all the necessities first and can handle it. Life is a lot more fun more often when you can enjoy non-necessities.

While they can get on by simply, most children would always want to repay their parents for looking after them by giving them a better life when they are around so passing away earlier should also be no different.

Sure, with the caveats above. For example, if you're paying higher insurance premiums just in case your parents might have to spend only $400/day on dining out instead of $600/day, then find you cannot afford to get dental checkups for your kids, you might have made an unwise insurance decision.

 

[BBCWatcher]

I'm looking for insurance advice for my kins:
1) 67-year-old parents with only Medishield Life. Mother recovered from liver cancer 6 years ago.
Would NTUC Incomeshield Enhanced C be good for them?

NTUC withdrew that policy from the market on March 1, 2019. It's no longer available.

2) 6-year-old nephew who contracted lymphoma but is considered to be in full remission. He has no insurance coverage.
What insurance would be good for him?

He has MediShield Life, I assume. If so, he will also be required to enroll in CareShield Life from age 30. CareShield Life provides some basic protection against serious disability.

Unfortunately the private insurance sector in Singapore is unlikely to want to accept him as a policyholder for major insurance policies, not without huge exclusions at the very least. However, if he serves his National Service and has a reasonably clean medical (which seems quite likely if his lymphoma is in full remission), and assuming no significant changes to the MINDEF/MHA group insurance program, he should be able to buy some insurance through that program within the first 30 days of enlistment. The group term life insurance and (if available) group disability income insurance would be good to buy at that point, assuming he's allowed. This'll be about 12 years from now, presumably.

 

[stillwindow]

Hey! Thanks for your reply. Hmm but all companies don't share the same underwriter right? Anyway even if the identity wasn't revealed to other companies, upon application, the underwriters will still receive the same declaration and medical reports so isn't it the same?

My agent has helped appealed but sad to say even loading was not consider. I think he also submitted the prelim underwriting to AXA and same results. Will application differ? Haha

Hi I'm in the same situation as you and sadly, unable to get covered despite trying multiple submissions. May I know if you managed to find one already?

 

[noobmaster89]

Would like to check with you guys here.

Is it a 'rule of thumb' to always have the insurance coverage payout of 10x your salary?

I have a lifeplan (PruLife) which started around 4 years ago. The same agent did a review recently and told me that my insurance coverage should be 10x of my pay, and eventually urged me to sign up for a term plan in order to 'top up' my coverage in order to achieve the requirement above.

With both plans running concurrently, it cost around $225 per month, and I began to question is it really necessary. Does 'risk level' play a part here? I don't drink or smoke, work in office but I don't drive. Got married recently but no kids yet.

Would appreciate any comments regarding me holding both term and life plan just to meet the 10x salary coverage payout. Thanks.

as long as you are not spending more than 10-15% of your income it should be fine

 

[BBCWatcher]

as long as you are not spending more than 10-15% of your income it should be fine

Another "rule of thumb."