Two policies are most frequently better than 1.
Prices contrast enormously, so ring around for the best proposal.

You can choose between getting a combined policy, which protects both of your lives, or you can each have a policy. Your decision will depend upon what the scheme is required for.

A joined-up scheme to protect your mortgage
When insuring your home loan, your policy will pay out on the expiry of the first individual covered by the scheme. Both of you need to be protected for an equal amount and there is no need to carry on the policy, as the mortgage will have been completely paid for.

An individual scheme for protection of relatives
If you are weighing up a scheme for protection of loved ones, people in wedlock are recommended to have a single policy, for many reasons.
One individual could be fitter and less old than the other, or perhaps one of them is doesn’t smoke and will therefore be charged less. Each person will usually want a different level of protection, as their income will be different one from another.

A surviving partner, who might be left with dependent youngsters, will continue to require life insurance until their children are grown up. If there is only one scheme between the two of you, then the surviving partner will be left without cover if their spouse ceases to live.

Fees are worked out on the health and age of the applicant at the time when the plan is fixed. If the surviving spouse gets sick as their age increases, then new plans will have higher premiums, and, in a few instances, not available.

If you take out two individual schemes, they can be on unlike terms and for dissimilar amounts to meet your personal needs. They will each pay out on the death of  your spouse or yourself within a fixed term, but a joint policy only pays on the expiry of the first or last spouse. It may shock you to discover that having two plans can often be cheaper than having one.

Reconciling Life Insurance – There are individuals, who may want to settle their life insurance schemes because they have been diagnosed with a  a gravely serious health problem or need expensive treatment, which they had not planned for and cannot meet the costs. Faced with such factors, it is easy to contemplate why a person might decide to cash in parts of a life insurance scheme to fund high cost and long term care. However you should consider that penalty prices may be imposed.

You are told to read sub-clause six of paragraph 324 of the small print, which informs you that you have been diagnosed with the  wrong type of cancer. Only the first five days of your treatment will be paid for and only tumours below the knee are covered, then it’s down to you to find the finance.

This situation may sound ridiculous, but even though insurers and brokers are regulated, this type of procedure continues to carry on. It has been a slow process to freshen up the industry and to make certain that clients get a proper deal.

A short time ago Cancer Backup, a well known charity, emphasizes this problem by coordinating a wide ranging mystery shopping surveys, which exposed some alarming facts about the private health insurance industry. It established that of all the leading insurers only BUPA provided cover for cancer patients right through the duration of their illness. Only the first part of the treatment is covered by most of the health insurance companies. Care or treatment over a lengthyperiod of time, such as chemotherapy or hormone replacement is normally excluded.

Although life insurance companies and brokers want to finance long term cover for policyholders with chronic illnesses, they won’t always make it clear to potential customers, at the time of signing up what they are covered for.

Although both  Cancer Backup and Macmillan Cancer support have been in talks with like mindedestablishments within the industry to lift the standard of sales practices and make the wording of insurance documents much clearer, progress has been slow since the report was published two years ago.

Private medical insurance and critical illness cover  is normally taken out by clients who are quite fit and healthy. Getting cancer is the last thing to cross their mind. That is why it is imperative to point out an insurance policy’s exclusions before they sign.

A testimony of best practice for insurance companies writing and selling medical policies has been updated recently by the  ABI, which is a welcome step in the proper direction.

The trade body has now suggested that insurers and providers selling these forms of life insurance should set up typical case studies, which explain the conditions when an insurance policy will or will not be paid. Sadly insurance companies no requirement to adhere to this code, which is optional.

Although the  Association of British Insurers initiative is to be welcomed, the best way of amplifying a policy is by asking the salesperson to explain the small print.

Nevertheless, industry terminology is in spite of everything still being used by insurance companies to confuse the consumer. For example it is wrong to grade cancer as an acute or chronic illness, argues Cancer Backup. However insurance companies are insistent that it should go in the acute category. customers are only told about this when their claim is rejected.

Even though the ABI have got their attitude right, the insurance companies can only be made to better their principles by the regulator. Better training of tele marketing staff, who sell a greater part of the insurance policies, is also long overdue

More rigorous sales procedures are essential with jargon being eliminated. In the end it remains the responsibility of the insurance companies to make sure that their clients fully comprehend the small print of their policies before they commit themselves.