My mum has aia plan too but up to age 100. The premium i paid recently, at age 70 is 8.3k.

You probably dont have much alternative
1) you continue paying
2) you find alternative from aia or other companies
3) you fund for it yourself

2) for older parents, probably not much options. On paper, they can enter into buying a new one but in reality most likely they usually have some health conditions by then.

Alternatively, and something i have always advocate is you buy something with a high deductible. Say 10,000 for example. When your parents sick, you pay 10k (that's what deductible mean). Any expenses after 10k, is borne by insurance company. If you can afford 10k on your own then the premium will be cheaper.

This alternative will be better than option 3, which is funding it yourself. It's less damaging but yes you gotta fork out some money if something happens.

Good move. Do consider to do extra regular top up on top of your existing premium from time to time instead of waiting for the insurance company to notify you which may end up with the above scenario.

7.4% multiplied by RM 14.6k is only slightly less than RM 1100. On average, how much cost of insurance charges is Prudential taking in every year for each policyholder?????

Good enough to make at least RM 1 bil per annum in net profits. Prudential's equity went up from RM 1.7 billion in 2018 to RM 6.6 billion in 2023, and this is after deducting RM 2.3 billion in dividends during the same period (2019 - 2023). And hospitals are the villains????




Does anyone here know if the average Prudential IL policy (with medical) can be bought for less than RM2k ??? Forget the low prices quoted in social media, Prudential is probably at the higher end when it comes to IL pricing and the way these champions market to women, there's a few PHD worth research topics there.

Unfortunately, for those currently with long-term medical policies, other that suing the ITOs and BNM for unjustifiable and unfair premium hikes, there is nothing much we, as in the public, can do.

But, there is something that can be done by hospitals and specialist centres. They can approach these fledgling digital insurers and takaful operators with a 'friendly' third party administrator, if there is such a thing, and propose to partner in the provision of high coverage medical insurance products for the general public at affordable prices. Get rid of the Big Three's (AIA, PRU and GELM) monopoly and the other mini kootus (Allianz, Hong Leong Assurance etc.).

APHM (private hospitals association) and the specialist centres can tell the DITOs and TPAs, "we'll 'promise' or at least try to keep our costs low but you guys need to do something for us. Get rid of the inner limits and just compete on annual/lifetime limits and R&B, but make them all above 1 mil coverages with or without deductibles/co-pays for all medically necessary treatments/procedures. Cover all medical appliances/surgical implants, advanced treatments/procedures, with no exclusions and include coverage for all age groups and pre-existing conditions - no linking of R&B coverage with coverage for treatments/procedures, every type of R&B gets the same level and type of medical care. In exchange, the hospitals and specialists will lower the margins embedded in hospital supplies and services and push some of it back into R&B pricing."

Something tells me that even if all age groups and lives with pre existing conditions were covered, the product would still be affordable. It only costs RM 3100 for a 35 yr old to have a full cover medical card with 12.1 claimants per 100 policyholders and average medical bill size per claimant of RM 25.4k.






Just looks at the ridiculous amounts the BIG three are earning in net profits. Over RM 23 billion within 6 years (2018 - 2023). And they managed to pay out nearly RM 13 billion in dividends/capital reduction during that period. The funny thing is GELM made RM 6.2 billion during the same period and paid out the same amount in dividends. 100% dividend payout - if earnings account for adjustments.

Being pre-diabetic is something that a significant number of Malaysians face. Great Eastern has more than 1 million IL policyholders and, regardless of underwriting stringency, I would be surprised if their medical pool doesn't have the same or similar levels of exposure to morbidities as that of the national population.

You are currently being asked to pay RM 700 per month (which includes an additional RM 200 per month loading) or RM 8400 per annum for medical cover, death/TPD benefits of RM 100k and RM 200k in critical illness coverage.

I'm also assuming you are being offered the Smart Health Protector (SHP) Plan (with RM 500 deductible). While GE has yet to publish the proportion of claimants and the average claim amount per claimant for the SHP plan, I would like to draw your attention to Smart Medic Shield's and GE's overall claim experience.

Based on what you see below, the average medical pool claims cost is only RM 558 for Smart Medic Shield (8.9% multiplied by RM 6.3k) and RM 727 for GE's overall medical pool (8.3% multiplied by RM 8.8k). And the claims cost per policyholder for the rest of the coverage (RM 100k for death/TPD and RM200k critical illness) may only be less than RM 500. Which could mean a total claims cost per policyholder of less than RM 1300. Is it worth paying RM 8400 per annum for such a low payout (RM 1300)???





A plan, with no deductible, that has an average medical pool claims cost of RM 3100 (12.1 claimants per 100 policyholders, with average claim size per claimant of RM 25.4k), death/TPD coverage of RM 200k and critical illness cover up to RM 200k would reasonably cost only around RM 4.2k.

Is the quotation fair? A hard no, for me.

Very good. We need to ask: what is a fair rate for a substandard life?

The current industry practice when it comes to the application of loading factors for substandard lives (high BMI, heavy smoker, present comorbidities) is to rely on loading rates as embedded within their underwriting engine. The underwriting engine and loading rates are supplied by foreign reinsurers operating in Malaysia. These rates have not been tested to see if they are appropriate for our local population. It may be too high - but we can't be certain until a proper study is done.

Having said that, I would like to posit that whether it be for death, disability or medical coverage, community rating can still be acceptable and that there is no need for loading factors to be applied.  In fact, the only rating differentials that need be applied can be limited to just age and sex. Age bands for medical coverage, attained age & sex for death & disability coverage.

The most important aspect is for the medical or life pool to have a large base reflective of the population's morbidities.

Cancer incidence rate is less than 50k per annum and even if we boost it up to 150k needing treatment per annum it still is only about 5000 per 1 million population needing treatment.

There are about 50k people needing dialysis every year and even if we assume 100k needing dialysis that comes to only about 3300 per million lives needing dialysis.

About 350k OKUs have visual, hearing and physical disabilities or about 12k per million lives. Let's say about 50% of them need to be kitted out with medical devices/prosthetics and receive further treatment every year, so that's 6k per million lives.

For heart disease, maybe it's less than 100k people needing treatment per annum, and that comes to about 3300 per million lives.

If you take all these high risk groups and tally them together, they only come to around 17600 per million lives or 1.8 per 100 policyholders needing treatment/medical equipment. The pricing I had in mind, which may be on the higher end had accounted for 3 per 100 policyholders needing above 30k medical care,  with an average bill size of RM80k. And it only cost RM3100, without deductible, for someone between the ages of 20 and 40.

So, I still think a substandard life can get 200k death/TPD, up to 200k disability, and a really high powered medical card all for RM 4200 per annum.

Malaysians are not incapable of understanding this data. It just needs to be explained to them. And they have a stake in it.

Let me ask you, if everyone is dehydrated due to not having enough water to drink, what use is it pointing to a poisoned well? That's the unfortunate state of life & medical insurance in Malaysia. They bleed you dry for a small token payments. The industry needs a complete overhaul.

https://www.moh.gov.my/moh/resources/Penerb..._2023_Final.pdf

https://www.dosm.gov.my/portal-main/downloads-log?id=9057

https://nci.moh.gov.my/images/pdf_folder/SU...T-2017-2021.pdf

https://www.malaysianheart.org/news-updates...year-2020-20212

As for the forummer's immediate predicament, I can only wish that the government and industry quickly finds a fair and acceptable solution to this unjust situation. 8400 ringgit is just too much and there is another danger, when premiums are hiked later on in a medical repricing scenario, there will be an additional compounding effect due to the loading factors.





If not for the profitability of medical insurance products, they would not be promoting  it WITH GOLD BARS!!!!!!!

This is what I've gathered from your screenshot

Policy 1: 50k death benefit, 50k critical illness & early payout critical illness benefits, hospitalisation GL/reimbursement (SMX & extension of coverage until age 99), hospitalisation benefits, waiver of premium (disability & critical illness)

RM 337.5 per month (current premium)
RM 357.5 per month (post SHP upgrade)

Increment: RM 20 per month

Policy 2: 100k death benefit, waiver of premium for death & TPD, 50k critical illness benefits, hospitalisation GL/reimbursement (ILHP), 50k accidental benefits

RM 232 per month (current premium)
RM 535 per month (post SHP upgrade)

Increment: RM 303 per month

It is really baffling to me that Policy 2 is being asked to pay an extra RM 180 per month or almost RM 2.2k per annum compared to Policy 1 for essentially an extra RM 50k in death & accidental benefits.

What am I missing?  It's ridiculous to pay an additional RM 2.2k per annum for an extra 50k in death & accidental benefits.

Something is off. Please check with Great Eastern. It seems to me that Great Protect Link may have had really high cost of insurance charges for the base coverage, which they may have masked by assuming high interest rates in the pricing of premiums. And perhaps, now that they may be using lower rates of return in the revised premium pricing, premiums have to be revised higher.

Really baffling, as Policy 2, which came into force in 2007, should or could have built up a higher cash value compared to Policy 1, which only came into force in 2015, although Policy 2 had a lower annual premium amount at inception - you would know this, so please check.

This is a bizarre case. And ILHP and SMX have similar levels of claims experience. Somehow, the ILHP plan, once upgraded, has to pay RM 535 per month while the SMX plan, only RM 357.5 per month, but the ILHP plan is only expected to be sustainable up to age 66, while the SMX plan up to age 73.





Please check if there are other additional charges, post upgrade, being levied for both policies (esp. allocation charges)

That is why these issues are coming to the surface now.

Also, I would like to add that any notification sent by ITOs to inform on the policy's sustainability is just a notice and not contractually binding. They cannot revise the contractual level premium set at inception of policy. Feel free to ignore it. It is only your responsibility to pay the premium amount set at inception of the policy. It is not your responsibility to abide by any notice requiring an increment in premium payments for sustainability purposes.

Oh yeah, this is really important. Policy 1's term for the current medical card is up to age 99 (2072) thanks to the attached SMX 99 rider, unlike Policy 2's current medical card which is only up to 2046 . Which means that when upgrading to SHP, the expectation for Policy 1 is for it be to be sustainable until age 99 while for Policy 2, it is a bit trickier.

There isn't a vast difference in coverage or features between the SMX and ILHP policies, once the upgrade to SHP is taken into account.

The ILHP policy, post upgrade to SHP, is required to pay RM 535 per month or an additional RM 180 per month (RM 2.2k per annum) for essentially an extra 50k in death and accidental benefits, compared to SMX's post upgrade monthly premium of RM 337.5. This part needs to be appreciated.

Perhaps it is due to the ILHP base (excl. medical) coverage - death, critical illness, accident benefit, waiver of premium - having higher cost of insurance charges compared to the SMX policy.

Policy 1 (SMX): 50k death benefit, 50k critical illness & early payout critical illness benefits, hospitalisation GL/reimbursement (SMX & extension of coverage until age 99), hospitalisation benefits, waiver of premium (disability & critical illness)

RM 337.5 per month (current premium)
RM 357.5 per month (post SHP upgrade)

Increment: RM 20 per month

Policy 2 (ILHP): 100k death benefit, waiver of premium for death & TPD, 50k critical illness benefits, hospitalisation GL/reimbursement (ILHP), 50k accidental benefits

RM 232 per month (current premium)
RM 535 per month (post SHP upgrade)

It really is frustrating to see people wanting better coverage for hospitalisation but end up paying so much more just because they have an old policy and are forced to upgrade within a bad basic plan that has very high cost of insurance charges.

In such situations, I would implore policyholders to be open to surrendering their old policies and purchasing a new one altogether if they truly wished to have better hospitalisation coverage.

Let's face it, the usual suspects when it comes to hospitalisation policies is going to be either AIA, GE, PRU or one of the smaller kutus such as Allianz or HLA. These are the main contenders. And every one of them will have a different underwriting and claims philosophy.

Price is only one aspect that needs to be appreciated. The other aspect, and one that I would argue is more important, is the payout. How much is getting paid out - number of claimants per 100 policyholders and the average claims amount per claimant - is what needs to be asked.

Higher frequency of medical claims and average claims amount indicate a less restrictive claims department. No one wants to purchase an expensive hospitalisation policy only to be later told to pay first and claim later or have impositions on treatment types and other exclusions.

Great Eastern fairs poorly, I would give it a C grade, in this area for only having an average pool medical cost of less than RM 1000 (RM 730). No GE medical policy, with a large number of policies or high claims frequency profile, has got an average claims amount of more than RM 11k. 



Prudential, on the other hand, has a got a claim frequency of 7.4 claimants per 100 policyholders and an average claims amount per claimant of RM 14.7k for its PRUHealth plan, which brings the average pool medical cost close to RM 1100. I would give this a B grade.

So, always ask your agent, prior to purchase or upgrade, about the hospitalisation plan's claim frequency and average claims amount per claimant.

Insurer to raise medical premiums ‘because of increase in claims’

kaotim by takaful malaysia also can be bought online up to 1.1 million

Check my last year cc payment amount...it was 4317

My mistake, ...it was not 3434 for year 2024 asI had mentioned.

As per cc record 2024 was 4317
2025 was 4656

Just because you or a few others think my posts are 'unreadable' does not mean that there aren't others who see value and find them readable.

I've put plenty spoilers to shorten the posts.

We don't want the insurance talk V7 thread to be a place where only points of view championing insurers are paraded.

Otherwise this thread is just going to be a one note where everytime medical repricing or some other major insurance related matter gets mentioned, it's always championing the insurer's rights or viewpoints.

For the past few weeks not many of you have posted much. Just one or two matters related to insurance, there rest were all just small talk.

How do my posts hinder anyone else from posting or reading other posts???

You are just creating a problem when there is none because you clearly don't jive with my views.

You think insurers aren't really out there cheating people, but I'm sorry to tell you, that that is just plain wrong.

Just because there exist a regulator doesn't mean the regulator has done its job.

We are here to be a voice for the people.

To give them the relevant information they need so that they can take action and I'm sorry to say, this may actually mean suing the insurer and / or regulator.

So please, stop laying blame on me. I'm not hindering anyone from posting anything about current insurance policies or other alternatives.

This thread is called insurance talk. All the matters I bring up are relevant and are of interest to the public.

Let's try to get Koh Yaw Hui or Great Eastern to respond to all the issues I'm raising if he and GE think they are right.

Why are they so afraid to address these allegations?? Freedom of Information Act will be tabled soon.

Sooner or later they will have to come clean.

It's not about insurance firm taking too much. After all the savings and maturity element is priced in. You also pay for the guatanteed returns. (Note: Although, yes, of course, insurers get higher profit margins from savings plan compared to pure protection products. )

Anyways, this is a Kaotim quote for 36y/o female with RM1mil covering death TPD. No surrender value at all and level premium throughout. 30y level premiums

Go see the news. All the people medical insurance hike is because they all of them buy ILP. Pay a lot suppose to keep your premium stable but that is not the case in reality.