Should I Stop My Living Policy Insurance?

[Guest Financial-Idiot]

Hi, My NTUC Income Living Policy is due for renewal again this month. I bought the policy in 1997 (this year would have been the 11th year) and the total premiums paid in cash for the past ten years is already balanced out/offset by the Surrender Value. The problem is I understood/read recently that not everyone needs to buy insurance. Eg: Those without dependants don't need to waste money to get insurance. My Mom has long passed away and my father is already in his 70s and since I'm gay, I have no wife nor children whom I need to take care of should anything happen to me (I believe my father would pass on before me). My siblings are all gainfully employed/married and earn much more than me. The Living Policy I have with NTUC covers Death, Total and Permanent Disability and the 30 Major Critical Illnesses (Eg: Cancer).

Q1) If you were in my shoes, would you continue with paying the annual premium of approximately S$2,300 till I reach 65? Or put the money to better use and go purely for (a cheaper form of) Insurance (Eg: Term Insurance?) so as to cover the dreaded 30 Major Illnesses (Death is not an issue for me since I have no dependants and TPD is very rare and hard to claim)? If you were in my shoes, would you cancel the Living Policy and opt for cheaper alternatives? Which ones? Any financially savvy individual care to share and advise as I believe this is an issue most PLUs would face?

Q2) What about IncomeShield and Dependants Protection Scheme? Should I continue or terminate?

Q3) Also should I enrol for the coming ElderShield? And with NTUC Income again or Aviva?

Please kindly share and advise with all my points above. Thank you very much for all your needed help in advance...

[nicefatboy]

Some questions

1. How old are you now?

2. Is the home you are living in fully paid for?

3. Are you in good health ie no diabetes or heart problems etc

[Guest btm42]

Enrolment for Eldershield is automatic when you reach age 40.

The definitions for the 30 critical illnesses were standardised by the insurance companies some years back. Your policy could have been bought before this standardisation, and this means that your policy include a couple of critical illnesses that is outside the the current standard list. You could ask a financial adviser to go through the policy to check.

The most important insurance policy that you should have is a "Comprehensive" medical insurance policy (as opposed to "Catastrophic" medical insurance which the basic Medishield provides). This comprehensive medical insurance policy usually means Hospitalisation & Surgical (H&S) and also sometimes cover visits to GPs and specialists.

(Catastrophic medical insurance usually means that it only pays for serious illnesses that require larger amount of money, whether comprehensive covers a more wider range of treatments including the less expensive treatments. There is some overlap between the 2 types.)

Many people buy such H&S policies that is tied to their employer, but once they leave the company, the H&S policy stops. This is not an ideal situation. For example, if a person develops a medical condition (e.g. diabetes) when being employed, when he leaves the company, he is most likely unable to buy a H&S policy outside. At most, he might be able to get a H&S policy but specifically excludes diabetes.

In recognition of this company-specific restriction, some employers are offering portable H&S schemes so that when their staff leaves, the H&S policy can continue to cover the staff indefinitely. Alternatively, you could forgo the company's H&S scheme, and buy a private H&S scheme which is not tied to employer but this is more expensive.

Nowdays, private insurance companies are offering their enhanced versions of "Medishield" schemes which is more a hybrid of the most basic Medishield and the features of comprehensive medical insurance. If you find the usual comprehensive medical insurance policies expensive, then you could consider to go for these hybrid Medishield schemes (e.g. Aviva's MyShield).

By the way, note that if H&S policies cover treatment for critical illnesses. As such, you do not really need a critical illnesses policy. Of course, a critical illness policy pays out in lump sum, which you can use as a sort of replacement income for the period that you are unable to work due to critical illness.

Whole life policies have a savings component, and are typically 5 to 10 times more expensive that the term policy. Remember that you have to pay the premium every year, regardless of whether you are employed or unemployed. This is not flexible. I would go for a term policy, and uses the difference in premiums to invest in longer term investments. Should I be unemployed, at least I could temporarily stop the investment, but continue to pay the much cheaper premium for the term insurance. The strategy is usually called "buy term and invest the rest or BTITR".

Term insurance can be structured to end when you reached your target retirement age. This is because when you stopped working at retirement age, you no longer receives a salary, and there is no longer a need to "protect" this salary.

[Guest Insurance idiot]

If your income can well aford the policies and you are not hard-up for money, I suggest you continue if there are still accumulated bonus for continuing it.

I paid for my AIA policies for nearly 18 years and it hardly breakeven. During down time, I surrendered my two policies to buy a 3-room HDB. I think now my 3-room investment income is more than my AIA savings policies if I would have continued till age 60yo.

I never quite trust insurance. It is like paying loan installment every month endlessly in good or bad time. If one has enough savings monthly, there is no need to buy insurance. Even if critical illness were to happen, insurance policies will never have enough to cover you fully, you still need to fork out cash to pay part of hospital bill. In short, insurance is meant for people who are poor in financial planning.

Tha above is my take, but critical illness policies is still a good policy though.

[Guest Larry]

I only believe in insurance with endowment, i.e. after a number of fixed years (mine are 25 years), I am able to get back the principal sum insured + yearly bonus declared + term end bonus.

One of the policy I bought from ICS (now renamed Aviva) of insurance sum of 100k for 25 years, I would be able to get 200k at least. This return is adjusted downward as compared to the original 2.78 times return suggested by my agent 20 years ago. Anyway, it is still a good investment.

For all endowment policies I took up, I add in a term ridder of $100k for a $12 monthly premium just in case for any accident. This portion has no investment return (in another word, this $12 will go straight to insurance company pocket if there is no accident during the period, $100k will be given if there is accident), honestly who is looking for accident?

Current government initiated schemes such as medishield, medisave & eldershield should be sufficient. Honestly speaking, no point to live long but with serious or long term illness. (Juat for info, one of my good friend who is a veteran banker told me that it is no worth to take up eldershield & is better to withdraw all & re-invest, I have yet to prove his point right or wrong).

That my 2 cents of though. Please don't crucify me.

[Guest btm42]

Endowment policy is like a whole life policy, except that the endowment policy comes with a maturity date.

If at 25 years old, you took up a 20-year endowment plan, it would mature when you are 45 years old, and then you would have to buy new insurance at aged 45. If you have developed a medical condition by then, it could be hard to get another insurance policy. Of course you could choose a longer term endowment plan that matures at about the same time as your retirement age. For whole life plan, when the policy holder reaches retirement age, he could surrender the policy for the cash value, or continue to pay premiums to keep the policy in force.

Endowment plan, just like whole life plan, is 5 to 10 times more expensive than a term insurance plan, and the downside is that you are forced to save that big amount every year, regardless of the your financial / job situation, which I find somewhat inflexible.

By the way, insurance agents like to "push" whole life and endowment plans because the commissions are much higher than term insurance plans.

[CMeng]

Hi Financial-idiot,

Do you mind sending me an email so that I can get in touch with you and address your issues.

There are many other more affordable plans which can cater to your needs. I shall share more with you when you touch base with me k? Here's my email address: cheanm@hotmail.com

Hope to hear from you soon.

Regards,

Cmeng

Hi, My NTUC Income Living Policy is due for renewal again this month. I bought the policy in 1997 (this year would have been the 11th year) and the total premiums paid in cash for the past ten years is already balanced out/offset by the Surrender Value. The problem is I understood/read recently that not everyone needs to buy insurance. Eg: Those without dependants don't need to waste money to get insurance. My Mom has long passed away and my father is already in his 70s and since I'm gay, I have no wife nor children whom I need to take care of should anything happen to me (I believe my father would pass on before me). My siblings are all gainfully employed/married and earn much more than me. The Living Policy I have with NTUC covers Death, Total and Permanent Disability and the 30 Major Critical Illnesses (Eg: Cancer).

Q1) If you were in my shoes, would you continue with paying the annual premium of approximately S$2,300 till I reach 65? Or put the money to better use and go purely for (a cheaper form of) Insurance (Eg: Term Insurance?) so as to cover the dreaded 30 Major Illnesses (Death is not an issue for me since I have no dependants and TPD is very rare and hard to claim)? If you were in my shoes, would you cancel the Living Policy and opt for cheaper alternatives? Which ones? Any financially savvy individual care to share and advise as I believe this is an issue most PLUs would face?

Q2) What about IncomeShield and Dependants Protection Scheme? Should I continue or terminate?

Q3) Also should I enrol for the coming ElderShield? And with NTUC Income again or Aviva?

Please kindly share and advise with all my points above. Thank you very much for all your needed help in advance...

[Guest Larry]

Endowment plan, just like whole life plan, is 5 to 10 times more expensive than a term insurance plan, and the downside is that you are forced to save that big amount every year, regardless of the your financial / job situation, which I find somewhat inflexible.

By the way, insurance agents like to "push" whole life and endowment plans because the commissions are much higher than term insurance plans.

Yes, I agree. Do not be fool or blind by the prospective return, make sure the monthly premium is affortable, that you are able to service the policy even if you are jobless for a period of time. Anything surrender less than 5 years would be a total loss.

[jazz]

I only believe in insurance with endowment, i.e. after a number of fixed years (mine are 25 years), I am able to get back the principal sum insured + yearly bonus declared + term end bonus.

... ... ...

I never believe in Endowment Policies as the returns are very low, at around 3.5% - 5 % pa.

There are a lot of investment plans with better returns.

However, if you the kind who do not know how to save, then an Endowment Policy would be a good plan to help you set aside $, and like what Larry (@ 4.57 pm) had said, make sure the premium are affordable. Never over commit. 20-25 years is a long long period of time....

Edited July 9, 2008 by jazz

[jazz]

Yes, I agree. Do not be fool or blind by the prospective return, make sure the monthly premium is affortable, that you are able to service the policy even if you are jobless for a period of time. Anything surrender less than 5 years would be a total loss.

For Endowment Plans (traditional plans), say 25 years term, the breakeven period is around 18 - 19 years....

Even so, you would have lost on Opportunity Costs and Inflation Cost.

[jazz]

Enrolment for Eldershield is automatic when you reach age 40.

Yes. It's an opt-out scheme.

However, it is not sufficient and one should always, if financial permits, to upgrade it with one of the appointed insurers (ie AVIVA, NTUC or GE)

The definitions for the 30 critical illnesses were standardised by the insurance companies some years back. Your policy could have been bought before this standardisation, and this means that your policy include a couple of critical illnesses that is outside the the current standard list. You could ask a financial adviser to go through the policy to check.

Not really.

Before the standardisation of the definition, insurers have also 30 critical illnesses on their list (which differ from insurer to insurer).

So, your policy would not have "extra" coverage (or "covering illnesses out of the current standard list").

Nowadays, just that the definition of the 37 critical illnesses have been standardised and from this list, each insurer will choose 30 of them and offer it.

Edited July 9, 2008 by jazz

[Baloo]

Insurance is like that,... you never need it till you need it... and when you do need it, and you don't have it, you will wish you bot it long ago...

gay people need even more insurance. it's not for if you die... it's for if you DID NOT DIE... dying is easy... *flush* and you are gone...

but if you got critical illness that need long term financial ability... your savings is your savings... wouldn't you rather have an insurance company PAY YOU as per the plan so you can KEEP YOUR MONEY and use the insurance money for a while???

someone in here suggesting that own savings is enough??? dun need insurance money??? believe me... when you need it, you will wish you bot 100 times more...

that's the trouble with insurance... (and banks - they only want to lend you money when you are financially sound... who needs more loans when financially sound?????)

but at least, the insurance agent will be an angel when you are in need, and covered by insurance... he will be the only man GIVING YOU MONEY when everyone else is asking you to settle your outstanding bills... no one even thought this far??? great scott... and gay people are supposed to be more intellegent, and creative, and clever and more perceptive than others???? well, the pendulum swings both ways it seems...

what's the issue here is the type of insurance you need to cover yourself with... and life policy is for if you dun die by age 90... and pok gai leow from own savings becos you dun have a steady and permenant stream of residual income (all jobs and careers terminate at 65 or whatever legal age by the time you hit it... any enjoyment after 5 years, illness and shit will creep in... and by 75, if you dun die you better be fugging fit and employed)

how much i want in my savings?? try infinite millions of Euros or Gold Bullion.... else i have a few pieces of property collecting rent as residual income... or some MLM gig that's ongoing and doing well. no other way dudes... you want to play stocks and shares??? die before 70 in heart attack ar.....

dun need insurance??? wait till you want it and they won't sell it to you... who give free money one???

[CMeng]

You are spot right!!! Savings is definitely not enough to cover one's income and expenses when one is down with critical illnesses

Insurance is like that,... you never need it till you need it... and when you do need it, and you don't have it, you will wish you bot it long ago...

gay people need even more insurance. it's not for if you die... it's for if you DID NOT DIE... dying is easy... *flush* and you are gone...

but if you got critical illness that need long term financial ability... your savings is your savings... wouldn't you rather have an insurance company PAY YOU as per the plan so you can KEEP YOUR MONEY and use the insurance money for a while???

someone in here suggesting that own savings is enough??? dun need insurance money??? believe me... when you need it, you will wish you bot 100 times more...

that's the trouble with insurance... (and banks - they only want to lend you money when you are financially sound... who needs more loans when financially sound?????)

but at least, the insurance agent will be an angel when you are in need, and covered by insurance... he will be the only man GIVING YOU MONEY when everyone else is asking you to settle your outstanding bills... no one even thought this far??? great scott... and gay people are supposed to be more intellegent, and creative, and clever and more perceptive than others???? well, the pendulum swings both ways it seems...

what's the issue here is the type of insurance you need to cover yourself with... and life policy is for if you dun die by age 90... and pok gai leow from own savings becos you dun have a steady and permenant stream of residual income (all jobs and careers terminate at 65 or whatever legal age by the time you hit it... any enjoyment after 5 years, illness and shit will creep in... and by 75, if you dun die you better be fugging fit and employed)

how much i want in my savings?? try infinite millions of Euros or Gold Bullion.... else i have a few pieces of property collecting rent as residual income... or some MLM gig that's ongoing and doing well. no other way dudes... you want to play stocks and shares??? die before 70 in heart attack ar.....

dun need insurance??? wait till you want it and they won't sell it to you... who give free money one???

[Guest Financial-Idiot]

Hi,

Thankx for all your kind sharing and information. Guess this is really an issue that all PLUs will face and have to deal with eventually as they age. Here are some of my clarification and response:

. Responding to questions from nicefatboy:

I'm approaching 40 soon (hence my question of whether I should opt-out of the coming Eldershield?)

I'm staying in my father's place now which is already fully-paid for (ie no more monthly mortgages needed, just utilities bill :-D )

Thankfully I've no medical problems now like diabetes or high blood pressure or heart attack, nor any hospitalisation stay before in my life. But medical problems will inevitably crop in as you age

right?

. Clarification for the benefit of other BWers (thankx to btm42 and jazz) : Indeed, Eldershield is automatically opt-ined (not you enrol ypurself) for you when you reach 40. If you dun wish to be

covered by it, you have to opt-out in writing. So my original question remains. Should I opt-out? Will you opt-out? Especially in view of Larry's veteran banker friend's advice. What do u think?

Maybe Larry can check with his friend for further details and advice ???

Now back to my original questions before we stray further:

Q1) Now that I've break-even, should I surrender the Living Policy and go for cheaper alternatives for the only option (out of 3) that I'm concerned about - Major Critical Illnesses Coverage? Which ones? In other words, should I separate the investment and insurance component of my policy so as that I can Insure (Illness) and Invest (More Liquidity? Higher Returns?) separately? Or should I continue with my yearly premiums till I retire?

Q2) What about IncomeShield and Dependants Protection Scheme? Should I continue or terminate? Incomeshield is a hospitalisation plan paid with Medisave. It is used for hospitalisation treatment charges (in addition to Medisave), NOT a plan that gives you a LUMP sum of cash when you are diagnosed with a serious disease. I'm a simple person and B2 or C ward in a restructured hospital is ok with me as long as the necessary medical treatment is administered equally. What do you ll think? But do you all agree that I should terminate my Dependants Protection Scheme, if not now then upon my Father's death, since I'll have no dependants by then? There is no grey area that I should cancel my DPS. Am I right?

Q3) Should I opt-out of my upcoming ElderShield (regardlss of whether I surrender my Living Policy in Q1 or alternatively sign up for a Term Illness Policy) ? If not, should I choose NTUC Income or Aviva? Anyone (over 40) care to share/advise?

[Guest starzyne]

Hi I may be able to help a little...

Q1) Now that I've break-even, should I surrender the Living Policy and go for cheaper alternatives for the only option (out of 3) that I'm concerned about - Major Critical Illnesses Coverage? Which ones? In other words, should I separate the investment and insurance component of my policy so as that I can Insure (Illness) and Invest (More Liquidity? Higher Returns?) separately? Or should I continue with my yearly premiums till I retire?

The Living policy, as u already knew is a policy that is mainly covering for the 30 CIs and comes with a cash value, ie a savings element.

This was bought about 10 years ago and premium charged was calculated based on your age then. If u stop your policy now, and let say u buy a Term policy that covers u the same 30 CIs, u need to calculate the premium that u have to pay for the same period of time.

You also need to calculate if u invest the difference in premium in an investment-linked (ILP) the returns be better should u have kept the Living policy.

Also, u need to know if you are willing to take the kind of risks for investing in ILPs.

If u r not willing to, then i suggest u keep the Living policy.

There are other options than surrendering the policy.

If u wanna know, u can email to me at starzyne@singnet.com.sg

Dun worry, i am not an insurance agent, but i train insurance agents, on products...

[Guest dunkindonut]

Being in the thick of the action for the past few years, I would like to contribute my 2 cents worth on this very interesting topic.

I have recognized that every person is different, and thinks differently. How they think on insurance is closely linked to their characters and their mindset. More importantly, how they behave towards insurance is closely linked to how and what they think of money.

Insurance is money. This sum of money, in different cases, can either be given to you or the people around you.

If you pass away, this pool of money goes to the people around you. They can be your spouse, parents, siblings etc. If you die halfway (disabled or critically ill) this money goes to you.

One thing to take note: with improved medical technology today, when one is critically ill today one does not die. In fact, he is most likely to live on, but achieve about 60 – 70 percent full recovery…which is almost like half dead.

When one is disabled (total and permanent disability refers to loss of 2 limbs, or loss of 2 eyes, or one limb and one eye….loss of a pair) you do not choose what to lose. You don’t press the pause button, and checked on the preferred box on the menu to decide whether you want to lose both of your arms, or both legs, or one arm and one leg etc…there is NO bargain.

In both cases, you may or may not be able to carry on with your job. You may be asked to go (think of yourself as an employer, emphasizing on cost and productivity) and you may or may not be able to find another lesser job. In such cases, you receive the money.

The money you received in such dire situation is your Insurance Coverage.

As a PLU, you do not have dependents. As compared to a straight couple where both husband and wife share the financial burden of the family unit, being a PLU it is so much more important for you to ensure that you have financial independence, especially when life takes your income away from you. Or else, you are really going to face the brutal reality of being old, ugly, malfunctional, poor and unwanted…later on in life.

Death is the EASIEST way out. Given the choice, all of us want to check on the ‘Death’ box in the event of a disaster. While we are not concerned on how the money is being distributed in the event of death (donate to BW forum?) is it wise to rule out how much money we want to receive in the event of us being half dead?

Next, I would like to touch on the products available in the market. These products are designed and created by Insurance companies, to suit the needs of the mass population. The Insurance companies know that different people at different stages of their lives and in different situations, think differently. Thus different products are being created to suit the needs, and wants, of the mass population. There is no way to say what product is the best, which one is lousy etc. It ultimately still depends on the needs and wants of each individual.

Two of the most common products on the market: Life and Term Insurance. Within Life Insurance there are Traditional Plan and Investment-Linked Plan.

(1) Life Insurance (traditional)

- Covers you for life

- Insurance coverage increases with time. Insurance Companies give out bonuses at the end of each year to your Insurance Coverage.

- Insurance Companies create a pool of cash in your account: Surrender Value. This cash starts at the end of the 3rd year, and increases throughout the years according to how much the Insurance Companies give you.

- There is a point in time where your total premiums paid to date is equal to the cash amount accumulated in your Surrender Value. This usually occurs on the 20th year of your policy.

- When you are older in life (eg retire at age 60) and you feel that you do not need the coverage, you can stop the plan and you can take back all the cash in your Surrender Value.

(2) Life Insurance (Investment-linked)

- Almost the same as the traditional plan, except that your Surrender Value starts from year 2. Also, because it is linked to mutual funds, your Surrender Value is not guaranteed and will be according to market conditions. Unlike in the case of a traditional policy, when the companies declare so much bonus to you at the end of the year (annual bonus statement, please keep them) they are guaranteed.

(3) Term Insurance

- Does not cover you for life. The longest I come across so far is up to age 75.

- Insurance coverage stays constant with time. (imagine $20,000 insurance 20 years ago, and today)

- No Surrender Value. When you stop the plan, you don’t get any money back.

One huge factor deciding whether you will want to get a life plan or a term plan is cost. Life Insurance plans are generally much more expensive than a Term Insurance plan, for the same Insurance Coverage. Personally I think this is not an issue: if can afford it, go buy a life plan; if you cannot afford it, go buy a term plan.

If you suddenly get a stroke tomorrow (youngest stroke claim I come across so far is age 26) and become paralysed, how much money do you want the Insurance Company to give you?

The mindset of ‘people generally gets critically ill and disabled when they are old’ needs correction. When our parents were young, they don’t eat fast food, they breathe fresh air, they exercise a lot on their blue collar job, they don’t have as much stress as we do today. Today, we are seeing claims on critical illnesses and disability happening on younger and younger people. What is really more important is to upgrade your insurance coverage so that in the event you are the chosen one, you can retire on the spot.

I mean, since you are already disabled, or half dead from some dumb boring illness…might as well don’t work and retire on the spot right? It’s a no-brainer!

On ‘Buy Term and Invest the Rest’, from what I have experienced from my clients who hold to this principle so strongly, through my reviews with them we have arrived to this conclusion: while we verbally want to ‘buy term and invest the rest’, in our heart we actually want to ‘buy term and spend the rest’.

Then again, you may disagree, and I hope you do really buy term and invest the rest. “invest the rest” would refer to investing on a monthly/annual basis, keeping in check your risk appetite and making adjustments to your investment portfolio to MAKE SURE that your investment dollars really give you the desired nett returns.

If you are not doing this, then you are most likely ‘spending the rest’.

You either pay today, or you pay for it later. There is no other way, no short cuts.

To Financial-Idiot:

Q1) Major Critical Illness coverage is today the most expensive of the 3 permanent concerns covered by Insurance. There is no cheaper alternative for you now, not at your age. Before you surrender your living policy, try signing up for a new one and request for a medical checkup with the insurer, and check if you can be accepted at the normal rates, or more than normal rates, or totally rejected. While one can look normal on the inside, we don’t have x-ray eyes to see what really is going on inside. Anything other than urine found in your urine can bring about a total rejection, so my advice for you is to hold on to your living policy (you will never be insured for that rate at that price in that state of health ever again)

Q2) IncomeShield helps to cover the bulk of your medical expenses when you are staying in the hospital. There is still a minimum financial obligation that the patient has to fork out from their own pocket, called the deductible and co-insurance. With the IncomeShield Plus rider one of them is covered (cannot remember which one) but the other is not. More importantly, the ‘As Charged’ feature of these plans takes care of Medical Costs Inflation risks for you. Tomorrow’s B2 ward may require you to pay today’s B1 ward prices?

Dependent Protection Scheme (DPS) covers both Death AND Disability. Is there a chance you may be disabled in life later on, as you age?

Q3) ElderShield is targeted to take care of the concern of Old Age Disability, and since Singapore is such a young nation this is the first time we are facing the issue of an aging nation. As such, there is no ‘past record’ to draw references and design a more comprehensive plan to handle Old Age Disability. Since the MAS is regulating the whole Insurance industry, there is not much of a difference whether you choose Income or Aviva. Both plans are not perfect, because this has never happened before. The plans will only improve with time, just like when one gets older one becomes more experienced and less likely to make catastrophic mistakes (all humans make mistakes regardless of age). Similarly, with time and more experience, and more data collected from the population on this tiny island, the plans will improve and get more comprehensive.

If you like to discuss more, my email is my76level@yahoo.com

I may take longer than usual to respond.

[Guest -Larry-]

Indeed, Eldershield is automatically opt-ined (not you enrol ypurself) for you when you reach 40. If you dun wish to be covered by it, you have to opt-out in writing. So my original question remains. Should I opt-out? Will you opt-out? Especially in view of Larry's veteran banker friend's advice. What do u think?

Maybe Larry can check with his friend for further details and advice ???

Hi, sorry for my late response as I was busy tidy up on my first story. By the way, did you read it?

Ok, now concerning eldershield, it is introduced to supplement medisave & medishield. Accoding to statistics, 50% of the elders over 55 years old will get into catastrophe illness such as high blood, diabetes, cancer & etc within the first 8 years. The medical fee related to these sickness will be high that patient may deplete his medishield & medisave accounts, therefore this eldershield come into play.

So if you believe in statistics, you stay put, but if you don't believe thinking that you are no the 50% group, then you opted out.

Regards,

[keyboard]

Would like to ask,

 

Insured age 66.

 

(A) Whole Life policy assured $20k, so far paid till 18 years (pay till 100) at

Death $800/yr

TPD expires at age 60 (free)

CI $230/yr

 

Insured has the $20k in bank. What,

1) should the insured cancel the policy, and why?

2) will the surrender value exceed the accumulated premium at some point in time (making it like a fixed deposit?)

3) is the interest (guaranteed like) so far? (3/5% as the benefit illustration says?)

 

 

(B) The amount of premium for private insurance is ridiculous.

A B2 govt hospital (As Charged) with co-insurance and deductible.

MediShield Life - $815

Private Insurance (As Charged) - $1287

Rider co-insurance and deductible - $1660

 

1) I can't seem to find any information on how much typical hospitalisation bills for specific causes costs, so how do we know if what we are paying is worth (how many times we are hospitalised)?

2) How many times do you need to be hospitalised before the policy becomes "worth it"?

3) WIll you reach the policy limit before it becomes "worth it"?

 

The next age band will add more than $1k to the private insurance portion. How is this sustainable for people who are retired and need insurance the most.

[keyboard]

OK, did some excel and see if the below figures are of any interest to anyone. For hospital bills, MOH does provide but i didn't find it extremely useful.
 
https://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/home/costs_and_financing/HospitalBillSize.html

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6bkvwe83huwzaj7/Untitled.jpg?dl=0

Edited November 19, 2015 by keyboard