both companies are in the list. one of the companies concern about multiple lump but again this should not be localized to whole part of the organ. yes, will call and if no good response, definitely will withdraw for herself and entire family who have been approved (but waiting for her because application submit in one form).

Hi. I don't know about that plan either and I'm wondering if anybody knows about the
medicare supplement that http://www.medicaresupplementshop.com offers? Has anybody used their supplement or know anything about it? It looks like it could be pretty good based upon their website but I just wonder if anyone here has direct knowledge of them. Thank you.


This post has been edited by joelietz: Feb 12 2010, 05:57 AM

my friend case, the company has reconsider provided that a recent medical check up is conducted. they still want to exclude lump (not only the current lump) but not localize to specific area

joelietz,

you did notice that this is a broker from california, US right? no coverage for malaysians.

cenkudu,

better than nothing. i'd still try to negotiate further once you have the results and you can vaporize their (financial) worries. i can understand they would want to exclude lumps per se but you still might have a chance with getting it only for the current one. it's all a matter of negotiation and threatening to not insure the whole family surely helps

thanks PJusa for your advice. beside threatening is there other points to say to the underwriter to that? let stay the risk to admit is still the same like people that have no history of that illness. and the risk is not same like other severe illness. if you have idea pls let me know.

cenkudu,

basically i'd use your line of argument. further supported by a statement there have never been any kind of medical claims for this issue (only if it*s true of course). you could also offer that this particular issue be excluded but all other lumps should be covered. i think at this point it all boils down to your negotiation skills and the mood of the guy on the other side to listen. a very credible threat to use a different insurance company will only work if you talk to someone who is in charge of handling the accounts since underwriting could not care less if they insure you or not.

it would also help if you have exisiting cover where there is no such exclusion. if you really want this company to insure you then you will have to try to negotiate further. otherwise you might really want to explore other options. if the budget is there, one of the international insurances will take you and will cover pre-existing conditions (including the lump). this would definitely apply to allianz worldwide care and i think april mobilité as well.

Underwriter will not be able to underwrite as long as they do not know what the lump is. Additionally, if there is a lump it is highly probable that future surgical intervention may be required, in which case H&S claims is almost certain. Under such circumstances, unless they know that the lump is something that is sinister or have the potential to develop into something sinister, they will not be able to accept the risk. However if they do know that the lump is benign(medical evidence) and not affecting any vital organ, at the least they would impose an exclusion.

hence the medical report but one never can be 100% certain. with H&S many can be negotiated and if all else fails european insurances dont do exclusions on a lump if no treatment has ever been required and a doctor certifies it's harmless. some wont even bother to have it reveiled. i went through 4 european H&S insurances before and 4 local ones by now and i never had any problems getting full cover despite suffering from a small allergy. with the locals it was however always a negotiation run while the euro insurances took note and covered it anyway. are you sure there is no way to get it covered if its certified harmless? i never had the problem so i am just relating from other experience - do you have more details on what is a "must" exclusion situation? would love for you to share that info for us to learn

The insurance risk of having the lump removed is very high. Unless the actuarial pricing include this, insurer will not cover this. The more risk is covered, the higher will be the premium. Different medical condition has different risk and subject to the type of coverage sought. As such if one has a benign lump e.g. a small lipoma at the back of the chest and is applying for a life policy, insurer will have no problem to accept it as a standard risk without any exclusion, simply because lipoma is unlikely to cause death(life policy pays only one dies). However if one buys a H&S policy, insurer will exclude this lipoma for the same reason I mentioned earlier.

sure but i am able to remove or significantly lower the statistical risk with medical evidence then i should be able to either get the condition accepted with a loading or i should be able to just have this particular issue excluded. the question at hand to me would be more as to wether it's absolutely required to exclude all lumps per se due to the probably slightly higher probability of them occuring if you already have one (albeit harmless and not requiring any medical attention so not causing any claim) or if it would be possible to say we just exclude lumps whereever it is right now from this policy.

and again: if you choose a european h&s plan you can get full cover without any exclusions. a lump that does not require medical attention is not cause for any kind of exclusion. at least this is what the friendly CS from allianz worldwidecare emailed me yesterday night.

but yes i do understand your point and this is exactly what we experienced here too. but getting back to the insurer and talking, providing further information so the risk can be better assesed also helps. we have seen this too. it's just a question of how little exclusion is possible as an end result in malaysia.

cenkudu i dont know which companies your friend tried but i'd check with allianz and axa. both are initially trigger happy in terms of exclusion but both are very willing to talk to you if you do contact them directly. from my experience with axa: agent didnt help but calling them myself did help a great deal.

Yes, the same logic applies, if the lump is harmless and do not need to be removed, then what is the issue if it is excluded.

well personally i would not want to have all lumps anywhere excluded but just this one. and i would expect my insurance to do just that.

The exclusion if applied should only confine to the existing one, unless there is medical evidence to say that this lump will erupt everywhere in the body.

Hai Xuzen

Mostly the best insurance comes up with basic plan.... so u just need to take basic plan,Critical Illness and contributor only...

there are two standalone plans for CI available: Pacific and AIA (now chartis?). standard chartered has a CI only for SC customers too.

premium is per age band. compare, there are signficant differences in the premium based on sex and wether you smoke or not.

Chartis formerly knows as AIG, AIA berhad still exist.
the stand alone for CI is available under AIA general insurance


thanks

Does standalone CI means coverage of Life, TPD and CI?

standalone ist just a pure CI cover. if you want to have life, tpd you need to either go for a package or buy those in addition.

but i still feel the stand alone CI is expensive in the long run

i dont think it makes much of a difference. but it does depends on your insurance requirements. for me personally i'd take a very very high cover while i am young and gradually reduce it zero by the time i retire. i.e. 1M++ then slowly lower to offset just the amout of money i would still have to earn to retire with my set level of monthly "pension". if you do it like this, then standalone is significantly cheaper because the higher early cover is almost free while the lower cover at the end of the period would probably be more costly. if you buy a package you get a uniform amount that rarely reflects your actual need more than for a few years in the middle of the insurance period.