Life or term insurance?

[Cashcow]

that's the jialat part .... twist and turn until faint.
That's why need to make simple... as long as cancer... can cure cannot cure ...just pay (is cancer!!) and close the plan...full stop. .. nobody want that kind of $$ right?

Else we buy a plan still have to make so much effort to ensure, to clarify, to this and that to make sure there is payout. Suffering from deadly disease already very jialat liao still need to worry if one can claim from a plan that is meant to help when such problem arise.

If the insurance company so scare gana cheat then dont sell the plan lor. Why need to make things so complicated and end up "cheating" the consumer in return?

Totemo muzukashii desu

maybe think too much liao

It is not cheating. Will you open a company and suka suka issue claim to everyone? If like that, I sure you will have a difficult time answering to your shareholders.

That's why you need a really good agent to help you settle your claim for you when you are lying in the hospital and getting cured although "someone" insist that agent is unnecessary and just want to eat your money. Kinda biased against the agent and company if you ask me.

You as a consumer shld still practice due diligence and understand the difference between normal CI and early stage CI. No one, including myself want to buy a policy and can't claim it in the end.

 

[Konnichiwa]

Actually we are more concern with the ability to receive claim at the lightest possible medical condition.

We aren't sure and we cannot guess the medical condition we could be in... but if two policies having identical payout for the same payout condition.

Obviously we choose the cheaper one..

Early CI dun come cheap compare to normal CI. There is a sunday times article on CI insurance.

I finally choose Normal CI over early payout, because, for same premium I receive higher payout and the premium I am going to pay is sustainable for a longer time.

Early Payout although more favourable however, the premium I am going to pay... only gives me little payout that is not really useful to me. I am more likely to die from poverty than sickness... hahaha

 

[audiovideo]

It is not cheating. Will you open a company and suka suka issue claim to everyone? If like that, I sure you will have a difficult time answering to your shareholders.

That's why you need a really good agent to help you settle your claim for you when you are lying in the hospital and getting cured although "someone" insist that agent is unnecessary and just want to eat your money. Kinda biased against the agent and company if you ask me.

You as a consumer shld still practice due diligence and understand the difference between normal CI and early stage CI. No one, including myself want to buy a policy and can't claim it in the end.

ho ho ho... no choice lor... due diligence to prevent from being cheated

 

[audiovideo]

Actually we are more concern with the ability to receive claim at the lightest possible medical condition.

We aren't sure and we cannot guess the medical condition we could be in... but if two policies having identical payout for the same payout condition.

Obviously we choose the cheaper one..

Early CI dun come cheap compare to normal CI. There is a sunday times article on CI insurance.

I finally choose Normal CI over early payout, because, for same premium I receive higher payout and the premium I am going to pay is sustainable for a longer time.

Early Payout although more favourable however, the premium I am going to pay... only gives me little payout that is not really useful to me. I am more likely to die from poverty than sickness... hahaha

ya... somehow early CI seems like a gimmick
did you check will you be paid upon determining CI regardless of what stage?

 

[Konnichiwa]

ya... somehow early CI seems like a gimmick
did you check will you be paid upon determining CI regardless of what stage?

How to check?

 

[Kheetat]

ya... somehow early CI seems like a gimmick
did you check will you be paid upon determining CI regardless of what stage?

early CI don't go by stage. It goes by definition. Carcinoma-in-situ, accelerates 25%. Removal or breast or prostate, 50%. Other standard CI 100%.

 

[audiovideo]

early CI don't go by stage. It goes by definition. Carcinoma-in-situ, accelerates 25%. Removal or breast or prostate, 50%. Other standard CI 100%.

based on this example....
if she prefers to have the lump sum than standard CI will be her choice probably .

errr... I put stage is "so to speak" .... I mean regardless whatever the condition the insured is in... phew... .. hope the insurance company is not expecting us to remember every condition, stage, definition ba?

to the agents, they deal with these terms and condition daily... but how many insured will go into details?

 

[Kheetat]

based on this example....
if she prefers to have the lump sum than standard CI will be her choice probably .

errr... I put stage is "so to speak" .... I mean regardless whatever the condition the insured is in... phew... .. hope the insurance company is not expecting us to remember every condition, stage, definition ba?

to the agents, they deal with these terms and condition daily... but how many insured will go into details?

Both early stage and standard CI pays a lump sum. Is just a matter of when the lump sum is paid. If you prefer to have that lump sum paid out soon, then an early stage will be preferred.

I don advise by generalizing the word stage, because thats not the official term used in claiming.

Thats why policy wordings are provided in the document. You can refer to the writings when you want to read about it. And most people will not read or care about it until is necessary, or when symptom starts appearing and one is scared.

 

[audiovideo]

Both early stage and standard CI pays a lump sum. Is just a matter of when the lump sum is paid. If you prefer to have that lump sum paid out soon, then an early stage will be preferred.

why is that so? ... can help to elaborate....

i thought depending on the condition, early CI will pay the amount as per the "definition" in the policy... and standard CI will pay the amount covered lump sum.

 

[Kheetat]

why is that so? ... can help to elaborate....

i thought depending on the condition, early CI will pay the amount as per the "definition" in the policy... and standard CI will pay the amount covered lump sum.

Standard CI Definition = CANCER
A malignant tumour characterised by the uncontrolled growth and spread of alignant cells with invasion and destruction of normal tissue. This diagnosis must be supported by histological evidence of malignancy and confirmed by an oncologist or pathologist.

Under such condition, insurance pay 100% of SA.

Early CI Definition = Cancer
If conditions are met in severity 25, then insurance pay 25% of SA.
If conditions are met in severity 50, then insurance pay 50% of SA.
If conditions are met in severity 100, then insurance pay 100% of SA.

If 25 or 50 is paid, the balance will still continue until the policy ends or the full claim is made, whichever is earlier.

 

[audiovideo]

Standard CI Definition = CANCER
A malignant tumour characterised by the uncontrolled growth and spread of alignant cells with invasion and destruction of normal tissue. This diagnosis must be supported by histological evidence of malignancy and confirmed by an oncologist or pathologist.

Under such condition, insurance pay 100% of SA.

will there be other conditions?

Are there conditions or situation whereby the claim will be rejected?

 

[Cashcow]

will there be other conditions?

Are there conditions or situation whereby the claim will be rejected?

...........

 

[devilish_me]

Actually we are more concern with the ability to receive claim at the lightest possible medical condition.

perhaps a deeper understanding of catastrophic insurance is required here.

if you want a insurance that pays for any/everything....i'm sure somebody could come up with one and will be happy to insure you for a SUPER HUGE premium.

hence the reason for all these gimmicky early-payout CI blah blah blah plans (to sell to people who obviously don't understand the concept of insurance)....sure, you've early payout...but look at the kind of sum assured that you can really afford given that such plans charge a bomb.

i just can't understand why anyone would choose to pay through their noses to enjoy $10-20K coverage. better to save up the monthly premium and self insure yourself. $10-20K will take how long to save really?!

 

[jack81]

$10-20K will take how long to save really?!

Sorry if this looks like I'm being very picky here... Just feel that the last statement is abit hard for me to swallow that's all...

The problem is that people do not have the habit to save in a disciplined manner. I have seen people who earn quite a good salary but after working for close to 10 years, only have $6 K in their savings account!

Then what about the others who fell off the grid? They do earn less and this means the chances of them saving is even smaller..

$10 - 20K may be easy for you to save up but please do not assume others have the same economic ability as you... Hope you do not take this personal and I never meant this as a personal attack too...

 

[devilish_me]

Sorry if this looks like I'm being very picky here... Just feel that the last statement is abit hard for me to swallow that's all...

The problem is that people do not have the habit to save in a disciplined manner. I have seen people who earn quite a good salary but after working for close to 10 years, only have $6 K in their savings account!

Then what about the others who fell off the grid? They do earn less and this means the chances of them saving is even smaller..

$10 - 20K may be easy for you to save up but please do not assume others have the same economic ability as you... Hope you do not take this personal and I never meant this as a personal attack too...

i know that i sounded like a snobbish jerk.

i'm just thinking that it doesn't make sense for people to pay couple hundred dollars every month for very low coverage...when the same couple hundred dollars every month if SAVED could easily be the sum of the coverage in a year or two.

i acknowledge that while my argument could make mathematical sense....in real life.... the difficulty is for people to actually save the money when they aren't "forced" to put the money into insurance.

insurance might promote disciplined savings.....but it does not necessarily make the best protection if an indiv knows how to save/invest on his/her own.

 

[Accesscode]

Normal CI dun cover female cancer.

You're so wrong with your statement.
Which insurance company are you from?
Your representation should be revoked because you would have been going around making this false statement.

So long as the cancer that's being experienced by anyone, any gender, meets the defined criteria in the insurance contract, the claim is admissible and the insurer is obliged to pay the benefits.
The attending doctor will have to fill in a claim form and write down the evidence of diagnosis.

Standard CI Definition = CANCER
A malignant tumour characterised by the uncontrolled growth and spread of alignant cells with invasion and destruction of normal tissue. This diagnosis must be supported by histological evidence of malignancy and confirmed by an oncologist or pathologist.

 

[devilish_me]

You're so wrong with your statement.
Which insurance company are you from?
Your representation should be revoked because you would have been going around making this false statement.

So long as the cancer that's being experienced by anyone, any gender, meets the defined criteria in the insurance contract, the claim is admissible and the insurer is obliged to pay the benefits.
The attending doctor will have to fill in a claim form and write down the evidence of diagnosis.

Standard CI Definition = CANCER
A malignant tumour characterised by the uncontrolled growth and spread of alignant cells with invasion and destruction of normal tissue. This diagnosis must be supported by histological evidence of malignancy and confirmed by an oncologist or pathologist.

cashcow could be referring to certain forms of female illnesses/cancers which do not fit into the standard CI definition 'cos they are typically in situ in nature (i.e. breasts). i don't think he/she meant that cancers in females will not be covered. but i suppose you should already know all these?

 

[audiovideo]

I wonder there are how many conditions out there similar to "in situ" where the CI plan does not cover?

Will the agent selling the plan be able to provide a complete list?

Is not right to throw those law or medical terms to the layman. Simple english please. Wat can claim wat cannot claim ... Cos I'm paying to be insured .... even peanuts, the insurance company still have to do a good and sincere job.

By the way, the discussion is not about trying to claim from the insurance company anything / everything ... is about CRITICAL ILLNESS. Nobody wants to claim that type of money! Is not a business about getting the best benefit out of each other, is about a plan that we can trust to help the unfortunate and family when needed.

 

[Konnichiwa]

Normal CI dun cover female cancer.

Slaughter the Cashcow! Milk him dry for punishment!

 

[Accesscode]

cashcow could be referring to certain forms of female illnesses/cancers which do not fit into the standard CI definition 'cos they are typically in situ in nature (i.e. breasts). i don't think he/she meant that cancers in females will not be covered. but i suppose you should already know all these?

I'm a layperson who understands exactly how insurance works because I read & analyse insurance contracts, and read up on bombastic jargons and terminologies.

And in-situ is not confined to the breast, if you know what in-situ means.

Any posting here by insurance agents or FAs are read by many.
Such careless postings, without regard to correctness, if read by females who own CI policies and who take them at face value, will lead to many implications.
Not that I care, but it's simply unacceptable.