You won't be able to do so as there is a recommend minimum premium to pay when you first buy the policy.

Thereafter any top up will also follow the same allocation system.

You won't be able to cheat the system =)

Yes, correct

Whenever you get a revision on your premium or when you feel like topping up when your budget allows you to.

If 30 years term is all you need, then why not.

Just keep in mind that the policy will no continue further than 30 years thereafter so that is the disadvantage.

to make it simple

You give me RM100 today, I only invest RM60 for you, the RM40 is my commission.

So if your interest is 10% return then you get RM60 + RM6, not 10% of RM100 that you paid.

Done

Yes, but there will be still on-going admin fee, mgt fee from the insurance company to manage your policy and investment portfolio

Mentioned a few times previously, up to 40% in my review

I honestly don't see the point of argument about COI when insurance company are here to make money.

Here are pointers:

1# Insurance company are here to make money

2# Insurance is a long term commitment especially medical insurance, therefore you can't simply just pick another insurance in the near future if you have any pre-existing illness

3# COI (Cost of insurance) will essentially go up, no company in this world would FIXED their price/charges on you without consideration of profit, cost, shareholder, competition, etc, Again refer to point 1#

4# Take insurance because you need a coverage and specially the ones that fits your need for planning

5# Don't buy because you get confused by agents showing high returns or tells you that you can get high returns from insurance

6# AGAIN and AGAIN, Insurance is for protection on your personal risk and not to make profit out of it

Insurance works on the mortality and morbidity risk factor when taking up your consideration as a "Potential Client" to them.

It's human nature that the older you are, the more prone of you to get sick or die faster than a younger person. Though nowadays youngster also die earlier because of accident as well (hence they change the regulation on car insurance that if you're a new young driver, you may be charged higher).

But back to talking about Life Insurance.

The insurance industry takes a "gamble" that if you're a young person, you are less likely to fall sick or die early hence they are willing to offer you a lower premium for a higher coverage but later on you're slowly paying higher and higher because the scale of risk is tilting towards "Higher Risk of going to get sick / die soon". Of course factors like how hazardous is your occupation i.e Mining, O&G offshore or whether you smoke cigarette or not will increase your risk factor for insurance to charge you a higher cost for being on the "higher risk" category of dying faster even if you're young.

of course this is not the same compared to all other industry, you don't see pan mee lady sell RM20 per bowl because you're older and RM10 per bowl because you're younger; nor do you see car dealer sell you RM100,000 for a Myvi if you're older or RM50,000 if you're younger.

It's a gamble everyday in your life, similar to Blackjack, you see the banker got an Ace, do you want to buy insurance ? if the banker has a blackjack, you lose double, or do you want to risk losing lesser by paying for an insurance?

Which goes back to, would you rather pay for an insurance premium or bear the full cost of the fees of whatever is coming at you ?

Would you want to pay 5% - 10% premium of the full price instead of 100% ? It's up to you. Whether agent profit or not it's part of their job to earn that money for providing you the product/services.

I find all the questions in here so strange and envious about agent or insurance company earning their monies by providing the services. But majority of the consumer are not envious when Dell / Apple sells you their overprice gadgets for a fraction of their cost. Somehow consumers are so "concern" about how insurance company / agents make their money and expect free service or something.

Insurance was created by the rich people to protect themselves from hazard, why use own money if can use from the pool of money.

it's easier to use from a pool of money created by 100,000 ppl than you yourself creating that pool of money yourself (unless you're a billionaire then instead of you buying insurance, you should open an insurance company lol)

I would rather avoid answering your question as this will set a "precedent" for other agents to follow certain model answers.

An ethical agent should know which is the right way to explain to his/her client.

As for encounter wise, not much I can share about as well since I'm not usually the customer

whichever floats your boat. I leave behind 10% for the 300k and use the remaining 270k without much worries because I know that I have another 300k on standby if anything happens to me.

Hence I created 570k instead of just 300k. Which is a smarter choice ? I don't mind the extra money, I rather have more than less/just enough

This post has been edited by lifebalance: Aug 10 2020, 07:26 PM

the website you shared pretty much summed up a "responsible" agent who adhere to rules and regulation and pretty much need to do what an agent is suppose to do.

As for how a good agent can be good will be based on his number of years of experience in the industry. That being said, it doesn't mean the longer you are in the industry = you are experienced. I have met some Group Sales Managers before and they knew nuts about their company product, and they are 20 years into the industry. Claiming they focus only on recruitment only and training. These kind of agents rely on their customers who are into long term relationships already and basically just buy whatever the agent says rather than seek for real skilled agents. That's the issue facing in Malaysia.

Pointers
1# Good product knowledge of the company he represents

2# Able to communicate in layman on how the product works as simple as possible to the client

3# Able to explain the mechanics of an insurance policy be it term/ILP/traditional/universal

4# Provide after-service of course i.e change of address, nomination, claims, etc

5# Able to provide tailor recommendation be it Term, ILP, Universal, Traditional policies

6# Able to advise not only insurance knowledge but other areas of personal finances.

the insurance industry agents still has a lot to learn.

When you talk about CI, if you have planned for the money after your retirement after 55 and expected to live up to 75 to 80 years old. Then you would have already prepared for that fund.

Then you may not necessary need a CI coverage by then, as I've said earlier that CI is a tool for income replacement.

If you're a single, then pray hard you have made enough money when you're old and grey for any major illnesses because no one is going to take care of you (unless you have rich friends to pay ur hospital and living expenses bill)

if you're married with kids, then hope your kids take care of your expenses if you're not rich, if you're a good father/mother, and don't want to burden your children cash flow, make sure you have enough money to take care urself if you're sick.

Like every resources, it will be depleted, your scenario has no example of starting point, we just assume "Yeah he is Financial Independent", how much is there in his bank account then ? what is his lifestyle ? What is his commitments ?

If your scenario is, oh he has no commitments, RM10,000,000 in his retirement account, passive income from just getting the interest every year, by all means sir, don't get the CI insurance.

Assuming 10,000,000 x 6% interest, that's RM600,000 yearly, you can't take care yourself with that money?

Again your scenario has no base or starting point and based on assumption, it's like chasing a rainbow wild goose if you want to hold this discussion. Because once I've given the above example, you would again come up with another different scenario that alters the position of this imaginary figure of "financial independent" with no exact base figures. My advise is, use real/constant figures to establish the base point instead of constantly moving the goal post. Then discussing will be much easier.

This post has been edited by lifebalance: Aug 10 2020, 08:17 PM

lets use your assumption that RM3,000 passive income per month is enough for someone, which means we are assuming this person doesn't work anymore (since he's retired and no longer employed). Which means he livelihood depends on this RM3,000 monthly, no more, no less.

If he were to be critically ill, assuming he has a medical card to pay for it. But instead of just RM3,000 monthly expenses now, he needs to fork out extra RM2,000 on top of it to buy medication and change of diet, maybe instead of walking up and down, he has to hire a caretaker to do the chores, hence the 2,000 extra.

How is he able to survive then ? He only gets 3k monthly, he needs 5k monthly now. The only way is to take from his capital which provides his passive income (this is assuming he doesn't have cash savings/FD/etc liquid).

Wouldn't this ruin his long term passive income then ?

How would you propose to solve this gentleman's problem ??

Changing the goal post again when I've set the base standard clearly for assumption purposes


Like I said, assumptions which may incur extra usage of funds needed, now you're adding in on top of my constant assumptions, for what?


Quite clearly I've set the assumptions and constants for the purpose of discussion and you haven't seem to come up with any proposal or proper answer but name calling instead, and on what ground do you have the right to say it's unethical ?

My summary is, you're a Troll.

may be serve by pretty insurance lady

as a reasonable consumer, if someone throws a paper at you that read as such. Read the fine print, look for guarantees, who is the company providing this.

No such info ? time to run off and have a coffee at Starbucks and chill.

What else ?

Let's see

1# This insurance hor, RM1,000,000 payout upon death, RM1 monthly only*

2# This insurance hor, pay 2 years only, then no need pay for life

3# This insurance hor, give 20% return per annum and pay 5 years only

Actually can't think of anything more ridiculous to say lol, maybe if you come across bizarre news, let me know

I can only find 1 news but it's 2016, but this is on signature forgery, not about false promotion of insurance product

https://www.straitstimes.com/business/ex-ai...rance-scam-case

Former AIA insurance agent Sally Low pleaded guilty yesterday to five charges of fraud and cheating, including using forged documents to dupe a businessman into buying a fake US$5.06 million (S$6.9 million) AIA Thank You insurance policy in 2002.

This is the second time she has pleaded guilty as she retracted her first guilty plea in June 2014.

Low, 40, faced a total of 21 charges - four for cheating, 11 for fraudulent use of forged documents, four that are under the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, one theft of gooseberries and an attempted suicide in 2012.

Yesterday, she pleaded guilty to three charges of cheating, one charge of fraudulent use of forged documents and one of moving crime proceeds to a bank account in Hong Kong. The other 16 charges were taken into consideration. The sentencing is likely to be later this month. Low remains on bail.

The long-awaited criminal trial started last Monday and on the third day, Low's sixth lawyer, Mr Adrian Wee of Characterist LLC, discharged himself from representing her as she had made an allegation against him.

Lawyer Mr Wee told the court Low (above) made an allegation against him. But it is not publicly known what the allegation is.
Related Story
Ex-AIA agent's sixth lawyer discharges himself amid trial
Low is said to have "perpetrated an elaborate and prolonged scheme of deception" on an Indonesian couple to make them part with their money, to her benefit.
Related Story
Hearing starts in case against former AIA agent
Related Story
Ex-AIA agent takes stand for insurer over fake U$5m policy sold to couple
Representing her yesterday was Mr Sunil Sudheesan of Quahe Woo & Palmer LLC. He and his uncle, the late Mr Subhas Anandan, had previously acted for her on the same case.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Hon Yi highlighted in his statement of facts that a forensic scientist had opined that it was unlikely that Low's customer, Mr Ong Han Ling, 78, was the writer of the signatures in the insurance application form which Low submitted to AIA.

The saga has seen many twists and turns since The Straits Times broke the story six years ago.

It began in late 2002, when Mr Ong was allegedly sold a fake policy by Low, then an AIA agent. He and his wife were told by Low that they would receive guaranteed annual fixed returns of 6 per cent and 7.5 per cent on the US dollar and Singdollar components of the plan.

Mr Ong claimed that after he remitted the premium, Low, without his knowledge or consent, used the funds to buy four AIA policies for him, his wife and their daughter.

He alleged that midway through the tenure of the AIA Thank You policy, Low deceived him into giving the insurance proceeds from three of the unauthorised policies to her by use of fabricated computer errors. Her scheme came to light in 2008 after Mr Ong learnt from AIA that the Thank You policy was bogus.

The insurer made a police report against Low and sacked her in December 2009. Mr Ong made a police report against Low in January 2010 for allegedly cheating him of money. He sued her for damages totalling US$2.25 million and $2.99 million.

In May 2011, she was charged with 19 criminal offences, including cheating the Ongs, using forged documents and money laundering.

In December 2013, Low pleaded guilty to two charges of cheating, one charge of fraudulent use of forged documents and one charge of moving crime proceeds to a bank account in Hong Kong, with the other 15 charges taken into consideration.

She retracted her guilty plea six months later. Low also claimed she was a victim of a ploy with Mr Ong to cheat AIA instead.

Low, who was made bankrupt by her previous set of lawyers, had her sentencing date postponed several times. She had previously admitted herself to the Institute of Mental Health but was certified fit to plead and stand trial.

Meanwhile, the Ongs are suing AIA and Motion Insurance Agency for negligence and lack of care. AIA is alleging that the Ongs are in a conspiracy with Low to defraud AIA and has asked Low to be its witness.

your scenario mentioned are all risk taking.

Insurance is about managing the risk.

if the person decides to go YOLO and go 100% either you lose it all or win it all. By all means go ahead, maybe insurance isn't even part of that person's vocabulary.

For a person who can achieve FI as you've said isn't someone who simply got there coincidently, unless you've inherited from your parents or you strike Lottery or you got darn lucky at Genting. Even then a person who has FI will be prudent and smart enough to ensure the wealth is maintained to bring continuous growth.

Not squander at the next Ferrari just because he became rich overnight.

That being said how is all these related to even buying CI I wonder. LOL