A new consumer-targeted life insurance comparison tool, which goes beyond simply comparing premium pricing, has been launched by Lifebroker.
The TAL-owned direct-to-consumer insurance service said its new online comparison tool was unique in that it allows consumers to assess life insurance policies by criteria rather than cost. The tool provides consumers with meaningful information on factors such as the insurance company’s size, financial strength and claims experience, as well as product features like the number of conditions covered, sum insured levels and exclusions.
The service also allows users to play with their life cover options, and save their progress so they can revisit the comparison at a later date.
According to research conducted by Lifebroker, cost is no longer the main barrier for consumers to take up life cover.
…a significant number of our customers want to make a comparison on the detailed features and benefits of life insurance policies
“While cost remains an important consideration, Lifebroker research shows that cost is no longer the number one reason for not having life insurance,” said Alex Homer, General Manager of Life Broker. “This represents a change from similar research over recent years and, I would hope, is an example of consumers’ increasing understanding of the benefits of life insurance, beyond cost.
“Further, we know that a significant number of our customers want to make a comparison on the detailed features and benefits of life insurance policies rather than solely on price. Our answer has been to develop this tool.”
Lifebroker said it’s research also found that 41% of people say they sleep better when they have life insurance, and 17% of those surveyed said that, to sleep better at night, they try to resolve their worries – including by addressing concerns about financial security.
“Accurate and meaningful comparison of life insurance will help people make the right decisions about a crucial aspect of their financial wellbeing, minimising worry and hopefully helping them to sleep soundly at night,” Mr Homer concluded.
How interesting,
Will this new Consumer Life Comparator show…….
As far as I’m aware there’s only one Income Protection policy out there that is a true income based contract and not “Duties based” … and only requires a loss of 20.0% of income for partial or full disablement due to sickness or injury.
As far as I’m aware there are only two contracts out there that have a “capability clause ” that will pay a client full benefits, even if there is no work, even in a partial loss situation.
As far as I’m aware there are only two life policies that pay a substantial disablement benefit for specific injuries even though it’s not a TPD benefit as we know it which is available at an extra cost. KInd of useful for arborist’s.
As far as I’m aware there is only one IP contract that offers to pay a surviving spouse the income benefit, tax free up to 5 years (an extra cost option) following the death of a claimant.
As far as I’m aware there is only one IP contract that treats Third Party payments as an offset (e.g. Third Party lump sum claims following a car accident) more generously against IP benefits than any other contract out there.
In fact after 5 years if the claimant is still unable to work, the offset is disregarded and payments revert to the original benefit payment. No other life company does this.
I’d be interested to see if any of these benefits are listed in the Consumer Life Comparator because none of them are offered by TAL Life or 99.0% of the other life insurance companies.
Please say which companies? I use TAL but would like to know alternatives.
Alleycat makes a good point and confirms my own feelings about anyone’s comparator. They are unable to rate unique features, as Alleycat points out. From my observation many comparators have no idea on ‘capability clauses’. But Alleycat opinion is subjective on the best income protection policy. Some would argue, why require a 20% loss of income at all to qualify for an IP benefit, why not just assess a quantifiable loss? Hey, its subjective, but a comparator cannot assess these points of difference only points of sameness. I’ve been worked over before by an insurer on a client’s ‘ability’ (capability) to work and him not hitting the 20% loss figure based on a so called Medical Specialist’s opinion, based on the flawed maths of the Specialist. Re offsets from Statutory Funds, there are many policies that don’t offset (particularly for A+ clients). To be fair to TAL their ‘Premier’ IP policy has superior features to their Standard policy, but I’ll push a peanut with my nose if TAL’s ‘income’ test for total disability is not a capability clause: quote ‘is not working in any Gainful Occupation and has suffered a reduction of 80% or more in the ability to generate Monthly earnings…..’. Surely if you aren’t working then income must have dropped by 100%, so what does ‘the reduction of 80% or more in the ability to generate…’ mean?
Comments are closed.