happy_gal,

i think HHalphaomega is spot on. you should seriously think about wether you need an insurance structured in this way. if i were you i'd think about what i really need first. please consider that health insurance should really not be an investment. it's a protection system. if you can accept that fact and hope you will not get your money back due to good health then you could consider using a general insurance H&S plan with a cover way higher than 100k for far less. of course premiums will increase over time as well. then you can think about taking life insurance + CI (or just life or even just CI - it all depends). an all-in-one product also means you'll be stuck with this product in case something happens to your health and you cant insure yourself elsewhere or when you cant afford your premium anymore for whatever reason. which is why i would always insure my health seperately.

almeizer,
thanks for the info. will check with them. i am not sure if the premium is attractive yet cause i dont have a CI insurance so i need to check my documents for a price reference.

ajau,

sorry - i should not be posting at odd times. if your health conditions change it will be equally hard to get a new insurance be it from life or general insurance to cover you. i was trying to say with an expensive whole-life insurance you will be stuck to this insurance if your health goes south. you just cant switch away from it and you will have to bear the premiums or you'll loose your health insurance since noone else would take you. another point to consider is that usually the cover is not too high with life (i.e. normally 100-200k annually with a max of around 1M claims per lifetime). a general insurance product is cheaper as standalone in terms of average premiums and can provide (normally) at least as good a cover. so if your health goes south and for whatever reason you would not longer be able to pay the premiums for the whole-life you still cant cancel it. but with a seperate H&S you can ditch the unneeded insurances and still maintain the H&S plan. of course some riders might take care of this but then again not for all cases (i.e. loss of job or whatnot) and this is why i personally feel safer with a standalone H&S plan.

and on a sidenote: i totally appreciate you reading my comment so carefully - thanks for pointing out the mistake in my statement

---

Added on August 20, 2010, 11:08 amthe MSIG plan for just 5 CI is interesting. it's uncomparable but the selection does make sense. i'd be curious about the list of exclusions and the broadness of the definition cancer. update us if you get the policy wordings.

This post has been edited by PJusa: Aug 20 2010, 11:08 AM

resident,

dont think so. it just means you protect your health properly. since there is no double claiming for H&S policies it's not like you can make more money. you are just creating a larger coverage which is less likely to happen than a small damage.

i hope that the insurances are looking through the applications with due diligence. but in reality i am afraid they will often just check what you declare and try to exclude to minimise their risk. only further clarification helps. also bear in mind: anything you keep from them is basically rendering the contract null and void. so it's in your interest to disclose as much and as detailed as possible to avoid problems in the future.

resident,

if i am not mistaken you have to disclose any sicknesses or issues covering the previous five years. and yes AXA is more comprehensive but essentially the scope will be about the same. you might want to check with AXA how long into the past they want information. it's just that AXA guides you better as to what to declare and as such avoids unintentional omissions better. if you have any doubt you can always confirm in writing with any insurance on any issues pertaining these questionaires. usually anything you declare in the initial form will be excluded or subject to loading. what you can do (and should) is to get in touch with the insurance, clarify the severenes of whatever you delcared and request cover if exclusion was the initial response or waiver of loading if a loading has been suggested. this can go back and forth but it's surely worth it.

i understand why you rant and i also rather have the insurance take any prospect without those checks but since most of us come without previous cover they need to somehow be sure about the risk they take. if you have a previous cover you may request for take-over-policy which gets rid of the waiting periods for you.

i am not sure about the consequences of beeing rejected since i have never been without cover. all we ever did was to request take-over which an existing cover present. even if we were rejected the old cover would have been in force. you can check with the insurance company or regulatory body on the consequences of loading/rejection of one application for future applications.

i answered all questions, referenced the old insurance and gave them unconditional rigths to querry on all claims made against all other insurance companies we have had. this is pretty much as good as a full declaration and is safer since i cant forget anything

if i have to drop AXA SCO i will have to take a good look into my budget and depending I would make one of three choices in alphabetical order: Allianz WorlwideCare, Lighthouse AsiaExpat (http://www.joy-stay.com/files/InsurancePlans/Lighthouse_AsiaExpat_Benefits.pdf) or another one of the Expat-Focused insurances, possible with a deductable to save on costs.

resident,

you're welcome. i found that lini from AXA's customer service is quite helpfull. you might want to ask for her. dont forget: anything you get that pertains your policy - get it in black and white. at the end of the day that is the only thing that matters. verbal commitments are worth nothing.

i take it that this is allianz with PowerLink right? couldnt get much info from the website besides a generic promo brochure. so basically it seems it will boil down to what sort of cover you actually bought. from your description that's not really clear. but yes it's investment linked with contributions for the first 6 years, thereafter the contribution is just 5% (95% is for premiums). i seriously doubt that 6 years of investment (which are charged fees every month) will do you good for a long insurance run, from their own example with premium at 1200 RM p.a. 5% or 60 bucks goes into investments from year 7 onwards. at the same time the service charge is already 60 bucks p.a. too! on top they have fund management charge. so just by using their charges you actually have no contribution after year 6 at all. you might as well get a non investment linked plan then

ajau,

read the brochure again and i think you should be right right.
but the brochure says this:

"95% of the investment premium will be allocated for investment [..] while the allocation for insurance premium is per the illustration below (based on annual premium of 1200)".

followed by the table which says

"Allocation for Insurance premium" : "7 & above" : "95%".

so in their illustration they seem to say 95% doesnt go into investment but in premiums instead. correct me if i am wrong - or is the brochure badly phrased?

download here: https://www.allianz.com.my/cls/content.aspx?t=847&m=0

ajau,

in a nutshell: allianz confused insurance / investment allocation in their own brochure? because the table seems to be pretty clear even though it didnt make any sense to me. if the people who sell those products get confused i would say its a bad sign

personally i'll never really understand why people who intend to cover a risk (health) do so by buying insurance that carries a new risk (investment value) and are willing to pay for adding this new risk as well. but i dont want to get into this again.

Kent3888,

PM you already. basically its the same what the rest said.

ajau,

that's ok. i didnt say you did. but to me it seems that way. i took another look. it clearly states insurance allocation is 95% which should not be right. if they did it's amusing and sad at the same time given it's allianz and not mom's brand new insurance sheme.

and yes the flexibility is an advantage for ILP versus traditional whole life. but then again the option to just take the insurances from GI is also there. it all boils down to personal preferences but the GI path does give more options since you can mix and match.

groggy,

i agree with ajau and HHalphaomega. if you're healthy you can look this conditon by getting a good cover. axa with max. deductable now and a conversion later might be ideal for you. personally i am covered by company + two additional policies.

ajau,

i never heard of a policy that differentiates between who bears their deductable. it should not matter and would probably illegal to do so as it would discriminate between policy holders who bear the same cover. can you show me / point out a policy that does that? they should go to the wall of shame right along with non-guaranteed renewal of the policy

ajau,

it's always worthwhile to read the entire contract carefully. the only policy with deductable i have is tokio marine medic plus. they cover the medical costs exceeding the deductable (10k per disability) and nowhere do they make any demands with respect to the portion they dont pay. and frankly i dont think any policy in malaysia does. i have read the contracts for roughly every second plan offered two years ago and none stated anything like that. i am pretty sure i would have noticed a clause like that. of course i cant be sure but if such a policy exists it would be great if we could find it and warn everyone from buying it as a back-up policy.

groggy,

company insurance is just a bonus. its good but what if we switch jobs/get fired/retire. cover is gone. so can claim there first then move on to personal cover. personal cover is currently AXA SCO (500k annual limit) and Tokio Marine Medic Plus (Max. Plan). TM is mainly to cover for outpatient cancer and dialysis if the need arises and as a burst-option in case there ever is a super heavy bill that exceeds AXA limit + what the company pays. also when you get older you are more likely to get sick so i feel its good to have a lot of guaranteed renewable covers just in case. easier to pay average expected costs than risking to pay a super big bill right
the choices are my personal choice and you might find other insurances more suitable for your needs. it pays to shop around.

groggy,

cashless. premim for M/40 is 1085 + 10 stamp duty. yes, you can ask AXA to assign an agent. it's easier to switch with an existing cover in force. you can be treated as take-over so waiting periods can be waived. make sure that existing and new cover overlap as to eliminate any remaining waiting periods that might apply.

must have checked the wrong column then, sorry. the downside of AXA is the outpatient tretment for dialysis and kidney (hospitalisation no limit!). that is why i have tokio marine on top. its specifically bought to offset this deficiancy and to provide extra 750k lifetime budget for dialysis and/or cancer treatement without hospitalisation.

---

Added on September 6, 2010, 4:59 pmedit: can you send me the link for the premium? i double checked and its 1085 only (there is no platinum cover, its called plan1 only). if you go direct can shave 15% of the price too.

you migth have checked the SCO pricing for another country. SCO is offered in hongkong, singapore, thailand and possibly the rest of SEA.

This post has been edited by PJusa: Sep 6 2010, 04:59 PM

that is not smart care optimum. this is the rider from their life insurance. i read the terms for renewal premium and wonder why the exact same cover is so much cheaper with SCO. first i thought the premium is fixed but that doesnt seem to be the case. look for smart care optimum then

groggy,

yap that struck me too. i thought first its a fixed premium based on entry age but that doesnt seem to be the case. the premium shedule itself doesnt seem to be fixed either so i dont see a good reason why the difference between the policies.

Angel On Fire,

you could state just what you said here and then refer them to the last clinic you visited.

groggy,

for AXA SCO max plan the lifetime limit for OUTPATIENT cancer treatment and dialysis is 60 k. i think you looked at the wrong cover/plan. i just checked it a few days ago so i am absolutely certain its 60k.
if you are hospitalised for the treatment, AXA will cover it up to the respective annual limit (i.e. 500k under max plan). i bought TM plan to get another 125k annually (750k lifetime) cover for outpatient cancer treatment and dialysis subject to me paying the first 10k for either sickness (or claim it elsewhere). that combination provides imho a decent cover esp. since both plans are guranteed renewal. you can get the plans / policy wording from their websites. if you want complet coverage up to several million RM annually without restrictions or lifetime limit i can name you three policies (allianz worldwide care, DEVK, lighthouse.asia french policy plan) but the premium will be much much higher (around 10x) and you might have a hard time getting the policy unless you have international exposure.

wegatech,

that is bad advise. just because you dont disclose in the beginning doesnt mean you are safe. quite the opposite is true. if the insurance finds out you cheated when you applied then the entire insurance is null and void. i.e. you dont have any cover at all.

the key is you need to disclose all relevant information - this allows the insurance to adequately quantify the risk in covering you. full disclosure is not too complicated and they usually only ask for the last 5 years. when we took our insurance i offered them to contact the previous insurance for copies of all medical claims and authorised them to contact all doctors we have visited along with a list of them to pull medical records of ours. that makes my life easy since i cant forget anything

of course universal healthcare would be better but sadly we dont have that here. if you want it and you have plenty of $$ you can get the universal cover from the companies i mentioned. we have been insured by allianz worldwide care for some years until we found the fees too high. they paid all medical bills (dentist, GP visits, hospital, pregnancy, ante- and post-natal care, vaccinations, you name it) and there was never any issue regarding reimbursement. i always got full reimbursment without hassle. just that paying over 10k per adult at age 30 was a) heavy burden and b) too much considering the health costs in malaysia. so we swapped for a (hopefully) smarter choice of insurance.

groggy,

talk with someone in the hospitals about the costs for cancer for example and the distribution about outpatient and inpatient. i got numbers exceeding 100k from various hospitals.

anyway i think that average cost of just 1k per person is pretty decent considering the risk covered.

you are not really burning money you are making a deal: i pay the average expected medical costs regardless of my health + admin + some profit and in return the company covers my bills even if they are much higher than average. i gladly take that deal.

the extra costs for say tokio marine is just a couple of hundred bucks (for my family under 600 RM pa. after 15% discount). it hardly makes any difference and it provides a well rounded cover. you must consider that AXA does not impose a lifetime limit (besides annual cover*years insured) - this is the single most important +point for me because you can commit early, lock in a cover and you dont have to worry about slowly eating up your lifetime budget. that's the sucky point which speaks against most other policies if you plan to take them from age 0 to 80 (or 100).

i personally would not try to allocate funds for sickness. its too risky. you might just get sick tomorrow, without enough funds, you might get sick twice (and the funds are depleted) etc etc.

in my view each and everyone should have a good healthcare plan. to me this is the single most important insurance there is. of course there are budget constraints but if you have the budget, i'd say go for it.

---

Added on September 15, 2010, 5:00 pmgot the TM policy today. premium charged will not depend on individual claims experience - the info given was as i suspected completely wrong hope this helps.

This post has been edited by PJusa: Sep 15 2010, 05:00 PM

jack208,

not an agent but here it goes: 3) its guranteed after 12 months. if you exceed one year of coverage you're locked in.

i would ask them for a in-house takeover to Premier MedicPartner, normally wont be a problem and probably they will waive all waiting periods for you. other insurances would probably do the same though.

jutamind,

since you are diagnosed with hypertension it wont be possible to get an additional insurance that covers this or related. the sup card is not bad, annual limit a tad low for my taste but it should under most scenarious hold.

other question: do you have additional money to buy more insurance. if yes, consider a policy excl. hypertension and related with a deductable as a burst option for a scenary going really bad where you're limits are used up. it would be pretty cheap to get another 3/4 M of lifetime coverage and would give you a lot of breathing room just in case.

jutamind,

you can try to shop around if you have good medical records and a clean claims record to go along with it. maybe an insurance will take you with a (hefty) loading. but most likely it's to late and you wont be able to get a cover for hypertension related. it's just too risky i guess. but i am not an underwriter. it wont hurt asking the worst that can happen is you dont get a cover.