NTUC income shield VS Prudential PRUshield

[comeonshowme]

Any one know what is difference between this 2 and which one provides better protection in term of more medical fees coverage? Especially for old folks, which one is better choice?

 

[HandsTied]

Any one know what is difference between this 2 and which one provides better protection in term of more medical fees coverage? Especially for old folks, which one is better choice?

The main integrated Medishield policies are quite similar. The main difference lies in the riders. PruShield's rider offer "100% coverage". Enhanced IncomeShield's Assist Rider requires a copayment of 10% capped at $2,000/$2,500/$3,000.

Assist Rider costs less which can be quite significant. Enhanced IncomeShield also has more plans for more downgrading flexibility.

 

[comeonshowme]

The main integrated Medishield policies are quite similar. The main difference lies in the riders. PruShield's rider offer "100% coverage". Enhanced IncomeShield's Assist Rider requires a copayment of 10% capped at $2,000/$2,500/$3,000.

Assist Rider costs less which can be quite significant. Enhanced IncomeShield also has more plans for more downgrading flexibility.

Putting the affordability aside, talking base on coverage, one who choose PruShield will be better?

I notice incomeshield is cheaper, but PruShield cover more...

 

[FP_IFA]

Putting the affordability aside, talking base on coverage, one who choose PruShield will be better?

I notice incomeshield is cheaper, but PruShield cover more...

In terms of just coverage, yes the PruShield rider PruShield Extra has a better coverage than NTUC Assist Rider.

 

[comeonshowme]

In terms of just coverage, yes the PruShield rider PruShield Extra has a better coverage than NTUC Assist Rider.

Okay, thanks

 

[HandsTied]

Okay, thanks

Even if you want "100% coverage", it may be prudent to get a plan that allows you to scale down your coverage as needed. H&S plans get more and more expensive as one ages, especially "100% coverage" plans. Getting a plan that allows you to scale back the coverage enable you to better control the affordability.

There is no point getting a very good plan if one cannot sustain the premiums when one is aged and need it even more.

 

[Insurance Broker]

Any one know what is difference between this 2 and which one provides better protection in term of more medical fees coverage? Especially for old folks, which one is better choice?

Hi,

Income shield is good enough with it's 90% cover with rider.

For old folks, need to check their existing coverage and health condition at point of application. Some company is quite strict in accepting people with existing medical problem.

Common problem with old folks are high blood , high cholesterol, can try Aviva that is less strict in underwriting.

 

[lonewalker]

Hi,

Income shield is good enough with it's 90% cover with rider.

For old folks, need to check their existing coverage and health condition at point of application. Some company is quite strict in accepting people with existing medical problem.

Common problem with old folks are high blood , high cholesterol, can try Aviva that is less strict in underwriting.

Agreed! Aviva is more costly during old age but good for people who has medical conditions but still want to get coverage for other things that they don't have yet.

Sometimes, insurers will reject applications due to conditions like high blood depending on the severity. In such cases, Aviva will be a good choice. They allow coverage for every other things except your pre-existing which is good as they do not reject your entire application as older folks will likely have more medical conditions that might render their application being rejected completely.

Point of caution. Aviva only takes in people with medical conditions provided they are not being rejected by other insurers. So you need to exercise caution on Health Insurance as usually for older folks, they probably already have some medical conditions that might render their entire application rejected.

 

[comeonshowme]

Even if you want "100% coverage", it may be prudent to get a plan that allows you to scale down your coverage as needed. H&S plans get more and more expensive as one ages, especially "100% coverage" plans. Getting a plan that allows you to scale back the coverage enable you to better control the affordability.

There is no point getting a very good plan if one cannot sustain the premiums when one is aged and need it even more.

Its true that PruShield is expensive as age olders, but mostly premiums are paid using medishield.

 

[comeonshowme]

Hi,

Income shield is good enough with it's 90% cover with rider.

For old folks, need to check their existing coverage and health condition at point of application. Some company is quite strict in accepting people with existing medical problem.

Common problem with old folks are high blood , high cholesterol, can try Aviva that is less strict in underwriting.

I guess 90% is quite good already, since income shield premium is quite affordable...I shall check is they had subscribe to the rider...

 

[HandsTied]

Its true that PruShield is expensive as age olders, but mostly premiums are paid using medishield.

If you are talking about the main plan which is payable by Medisave the premium rates are comparable across the companies. The costs of the riders are a different story.

 

[comeonshowme]

If you are talking about the main plan which is payable by Medisave the premium rates are comparable across the companies. The costs of the riders are a different story.

oh...like dat ah...

 

[lonewalker]

Even if you want "100% coverage", it may be prudent to get a plan that allows you to scale down your coverage as needed. H&S plans get more and more expensive as one ages, especially "100% coverage" plans. Getting a plan that allows you to scale back the coverage enable you to better control the affordability.

There is no point getting a very good plan if one cannot sustain the premiums when one is aged and need it even more.

Yeah, esp when you grow older the premiums can be very expensive. Opt to scale down the coverage. Older folks may not benefit much from better health care in terms of private hospital or restructured as their body structure will weaken.

Thus have an excellent doctor might not be able to reverse old age decline in health. So I second HandsTied's opinion that you should have plans to scale down the coverage when afforability becomes an issue.

 

[comeonshowme]

Yeah, esp when you grow older the premiums can be very expensive. Opt to scale down the coverage. Older folks may not benefit much from better health care in terms of private hospital or restructured as their body structure will weaken.

Thus have an excellent doctor might not be able to reverse old age decline in health. So I second HandsTied's opinion that you should have plans to scale down the coverage when afforability becomes an issue.

Touchwood but when something is wrong, the hospital bill cost tons, thats the worrying part which push me to thinking to opt for higher coverage...

 

[rarenick]

But ntuc assist rider take care of co insurance that exceeds $3000

 

[audiovideo]

have to tabulate the cost/premium say from age 30 to 75
then you have a clearer picture how much you are paying for diff company

 

[lonewalker]

Touchwood but when something is wrong, the hospital bill cost tons, thats the worrying part which push me to thinking to opt for higher coverage...

You are correct to plan ahead. However, in such cases, opting Class B1 and below will enjoy Government subsidy (as for now unless policy changes).

If you think you can afford it, then it is a personal preference to go for it. My opinion is that when we are in our employable years, aka 21-65, we need the best kind of medical coverage to make us healthy so we can continue working to generate income. Thus staying in private hospital can sometimes speed up the treatment and make us well. With better care, our younger bodies can get back our health and hopeful go back to work and generate income. After we past that age 65, generally our liabilities are mostly gone ie. kids growth up and parrents maybe no around anymore.

We still NEED medical insurance, just that we given private or restructured may not make a big difference in our recovery namely because our body is weaker once older.

However, you can still choose for plans to cover for private if they is your preference because, you can always choose the kind of medical treatment you want. So i think it's about choice. Eating steak at hawker centre or hotel is really personal choice and affordability.

So you can still buy coverage for Private hospitalisation if thats want you really want and can afford the high premiums.

Anyway all plans under Medisave health insurance aka all the private integrated shield plans are all integrated.
Meaning, if affordability becomes an issue at old age, you can always reverse back to Medishield without the need to go through medical underwriting again. So it is downgradable in a sense.

 

[rarenick]

sometimes the extra premium paid over the years can already cover back the co-insurance portion (NTUC Assist Rider $3000).

 

[iAdvisor]

But ntuc assist rider take care of co insurance that exceeds $3000

Just to clarify on this, Assist rider option is slightly unique. With this rider, deductible and co-insurance do not really matters. You just pay 10% of the total bill, which caps at $3000 pa.

Say, total bill = 100k. 10% = 10k. But you only pay 3k, and the annual limit will be met. Subsequent bills (in the same year) will be free.

If total bill = 5k. 10% = 500. You will pay 500, and your annual limit will falls to 2500.

 

[iAdvisor]

In terms of just coverage, yes the PruShield rider PruShield Extra has a better coverage than NTUC Assist Rider.

If i'm not wrong, For emergency oversea hospital coverage. Prudential peg the charges claimable to restructure A only (Even if client choose private plan). Think they are the only H&S insurer that do that. The rest all peg to private hospital (If client choose private plan coverage).

For NTUC, there is also no restriction on the no of hours stays in hospital required, to claim post-hospitalisation amount. Prudential require 6 hrs stay i think?