Because of that, (in blue),
May I ask,
What are the Current existing covered annual limit VS the new Enhanced annual limit?

Wow, 200k >> 5 million.
Very good coverage amount.

Just asking, does that insurance charges table that you are refering to, has something like that condition? ( per each $x net sum assured)?

Btw, if it were me, I would be very concern of my capability to be able to sustain or continue to pay premium of 5 mil medical insurance coverage after 55 yrs old or after my retirement without any active income.

This is a very interesting case. I can only speculate but you must confirm the following:

1) Your current policy's cost of insurance (COI) charges for the medical rider as evidenced in your policy's COI table (I'm assuming this is in the contract: please confirm) is either same or higher, for all age brackets, compared to the COI charges published in the new medical rider's brochure. (Please confirm that you are comparing only the current policy's medical rider COI to the new policy's medical rider COI)

You're wondering why there is doubling in the quoted premium when opting for the level up in medical coverage given that 1) is true. Shouldn't your new annual premiums be lower then? There are two possibilities why you're not being quoted lower annual premiums:

A) Premium pricing assumptions, in particular the investment return projection rates assumed for premium sustainability purposes has changed. Perhaps last time they had priced it assuming a projected investment return rate of 7% per annum but now it may only be 4%. This would result in higher sustainable annual premium amounts even if the ILP funds used are the same.

B) There may be new allocation charges for upgrading the medical coverage

Please write in to the insurer or ask the agent to give you detailed answers on why the annual premium amounts are higher when opting for the level up.

Anything disclosed in the brochure will form part of your reasonable expectations unless specified otherwise (for e.g. there may be new loading factors that you may be unaware of, so please confirm this with the insurer). Be that as it may, the insurer cannot disavow what is within the brochure by saying that it is not an insurance contract.

Always remember, regardless of BNM policies, no insurer or regulator has the authority to unilaterally alter core contractual obligations, in particular, something as binding as an annual premium amount. You could even challenge them to say that it is improper for them to reprice it assuming a lower rate of investment return as that isn't your reasonable expectation based on expectation as imputed into your original annual premium's pricing assumptions and that any new (additional) charges, if any, can and should rightfully be construed as double charging.

You sure want to commit 5 million insurance coverage? 1 million is more than sufficient if you can sustain it after 65 years old.

how old r u? i also received this offer but my additional premium is super high..i am mid 40ties
my current-
approx rm2000 yearly - coverage rm50k per claim/year and lifetime only rm200k. Damn freaking low
( policy started sometime in 2005 and 2015 there was an upgrade)
new offer
option 1 is appox rm8k per year (5mil)
-extra rm6k from current / per year
option 2 rm9300 per year (15 mil)

extra rm7300 from current/year
increase is really high
worth to take it? is it wise if i just cancel the policy since current rm200k max (lifetime) is too low and is not an issue for me.....

When you get older, your COI will become higher than your premium, and you won't have any fund from the investment portion to support it.

Well, the COI table is not fixed, it WILL increase almost every year from now on (especially the medical part). If you are confident you can pay the future premiums, then no issue.

EDIT: take note that it's not the old age increase COI that you need to worry about, it's the UNCERTAIN medical inflation, which will rack up your COI must faster than what's written in the table.

If you don't stick to your premium payment schedule, there is the risk that you would not be able to later claim that the policy is not performing according to expectation when it is unable to meet all those high cost of insurance charges, esp. at the older ages but also before then, as a lot of these older policies and even some of the current ones, have high investment return rates assumed in the pricing (which allowed for the lower premiums). These high rates are not sustainable. You can then claim that it is the insurer or takaful operator who is responsible and should foot the bill. If you plan on investing your spare cash that should have gone to paying premiums in an ETF outside the insurer, then why bother having an investment-linked policy in the first place?

What insurers and takaful operators have sneakily done is to reduce the policy coverage term to ages 70 or 80, compared to the previous term of 100 years+, and thereafter operate the main policy and medical rider on a renewal basis up to ages 100 and above. The way the policies are currently priced, it is highly questionable even as to whether the policy can be sustained up until the end of even the shorter policy terms.

The original sins are the high investment return rate assumptions and the unsubstantiated and ridiculously priced high cost of insurance charges at older ages. This needs to change.

Medical Inflation is a poor excuse.A medical policy with 12.1 claimants per 100 policyholders and average claim amount of RM 25.4k and with a five percent margin for expenses only cost RM 3100 for a person ages 35.

It's just to highlight that you need to prepare for much higher COI in the future.

When you pay the premium accordingly, you won't feel the sudden jump so much in the older age, as you already contribute into the fund since early days.

If you don't pay the premium and keep minimum in the fund, then you need to be prepared and discipline enough to set aside money and get ready for the sudden jump in older age. But this brings the question: why bother with ILP if you choose this option?

1) If everyone in the medical pool / investment-linked plan kept to their original premium payment schedule diligently and didn't withdraw anything from their cash values, and if it later turned out that their policies' cash values weren't sufficient to sustain the high cost of insurance charges at older ages, they would have a stronger case to claim that the policy had not performed according to expectation and that the insurer or takaful operator should foot the bill or any additional amounts needed to make the policy sustainable. You wouldn't have such a strong a case if you didn't keep to your original premium payment schedule.

2) It's something that you need to ask yourself. All your concerns
about waiting period, exclusion and other pre-existing condition clauses when opting for new plan, while significantly valid, can also be a risk (other than waiting period) with your current plan. Your current plan is also subject to all kinds of exclusions as well and the insurer can still deny or delay your claim.

What you need to ask yourself is if you still think it worth your while to hold your insurer accountable for any mispricing/underpricing errors in your current plan by maintaining your policy premiums and making them foot the bill for any issues that may crop up later on, e.g. policy cash values not being sufficient to cover cost of insurance charges.

3) Regardless of what BNM or the industry does, it is up to you as to whether you want to hold the insurer or takaful operator accountable. You can still keep to your original premium payment schedule and not pay the repriced premium amounts and later claim that the policy was not originally priced properly when it can't meet cost of insurance charges and therefore incumbent on the insurer or takaful operator to foot the bill for their errors.

4) For 41 - 60, with deductible would be RM 2900, without deductible would be 3100

Yes, there are some considerations.

1. Your basic regular premiums will likely have 100% allocation after a certain period of time. However, any single-premium adhoc top-ups or regular premium top-ups will have a maximum allocation rate of 95%.

2. You will not be able to claim tax relief progressively.

Your idea is sound but at that point why not just buy a standalone medical policy and pay the premiums annually?

I googled and found this, ....
Not sure if it is applicable to your plan or is my interpretation is correct.

Mentioned .....Cash value is used for unpaid premium, 
Did not say will be used for unpaid cost of insurance.
https://www.greateasternlife.com/my/en/cust...um-payment.html

There is no automatic premium loan facility for investment-linked policies - this facility is usually provided for traditional policies having cash values, like participating policies. Your ILP policy will be in-force, but not sustainable, as long as its cash value is available to finance any and all policy charges, including cost of insurance.

There is no need to provide an automatic, or otherwise, premium loan facility to ensure sustainability of ILP policies. What is needed is just a simple negative balance clearance mechanism (with no interest element), so that the ITO can track the IL policy's debts which will be gradually cleared as premiums get paid as time passes by. Any remaining negative balance at the end of the policy term will be absorbed by the ITO. The balance should not be deducted from any insurance/takaful policy payments should an insured/takaful event occur during the policy's term.

Just make sure to maintain your annual premium payments as per the level premium payment schedule set at the policy's inception.

Ignore any notice mentioning hikes in premium payments or cost of insurance charges. "Notices" are not contractually binding. The ITO must issue an amendment to the insurance/takaful contract, which cannot be executed unilaterally, if it wished to alter key terms, such as the annual premium/contribution amount or cost of insurance charges. Any right to unilaterally alter key terms of the contract, including annual premium and cost of insurance amounts, cannot be executed to maintain profits or to the detriment of policyholders.

Just beware of the possible amount that they may ask you to top up when the value inside your policy are depleting after a prolonged time in order to keep sustaining the policy.

Attached is just an example, may not be applicable to you