Long Term Care Policy Vs Rider on Life Policy

[Newby]

why do you think that someone who buys an LTCi policy today has a high chance of "large future rate increases"?

mrsed

Past performance. I believe the way to redeem this product is for the industry to introduce guaranteed rates. Let the insurance company assume the risk of under pricing rather than the consumer. It's a closed-ended risk. It should not have ANY rate increases.

 

[scagnt83]

Past performance. I believe the way to redeem this product is for the industry to introduce guaranteed rates. Let the insurance company assume the risk of under pricing rather than the consumer. It's a closed-ended risk. It should not have ANY rate increases.

I dont believe new issue policies will have the same percentage rate increases that old blocks of business have had.

But I agree 100% that the industry has to do something to correct its image or (redeem itself). The general public thinks that all LTCI policies have 20% rate increases multiple times in the life of a policy....

Policies with guaranteed rate periods are a start.
A cap on the % increase would be better. Kind of like a current rate and a guaranteed rate.

 

[Mr_Ed]

Past performance. I believe the way to redeem this product is for the industry to introduce guaranteed rates. Let the insurance company assume the risk of under pricing rather than the consumer. It's a closed-ended risk. It should not have ANY rate increases.

So you're saying that because a policy that was sold 12 years ago had an 80% increase, if someone buys a policy today from that same company that they're just as likely to have an 80% increase?

 

[Newby]

So you're saying that because a policy that was sold 12 years ago had an 80% increase, if someone buys a policy today from that same company that they're just as likely to have an 80% increase?

You must be holding your computer upside down if you are missing what I'm saying.

I'm saying they shouldn't have ANY rate increase. Price it right to start with.

An insurance company that had an 80% rate increase and ZERO increase in benefits should be avoided. They aren't even to be considered.

 

[Mr_Ed]

You must be holding your computer upside down if you are missing what I'm saying.

I'm saying they shouldn't have ANY rate increase. Price it right to start with.

An insurance company that had an 80% rate increase and ZERO increase in benefits should be avoided. They aren't even to be considered.

What if that insurer's current policy series is priced 80% higher than the previous policy series that had the increase?

 

[Justin Bilyj]

Mass has a decently priced plan, major con is that its a reimbursement plan. Never has had a rate increase yet...

 

[VolAgent]

So you're saying that because a policy that was sold 12 years ago had an 80% increase, if someone buys a policy today from that same company that they're just as likely to have an 80% increase?

It really doesn't matter. Consumers have the perception that it will. Image is reality.

 

[houcoogster]

One way to deal with this problem is to offer a rider that locks in the premium for life. Let the customer decide.

 

[Mr_Ed]

One way to deal with this problem is to offer a rider that locks in the premium for life. Let the customer decide.

regulators won't approve it.

----------

It really doesn't matter. Consumers have the perception that it will. Image is reality.

the problem isn't just with consumers.
the problem starts with agents.
if an agent thinks that a company that has had premium increases in the past will have the same premium increases on the policies offered today, the agent is doing a disservice to the consumer because the agent doesn't understand LTC insurance.

----------

Mass has a decently priced plan, major con is that its a reimbursement plan. Never has had a rate increase yet...

why is a reimbursement plan bad?

 

[houcoogster]

regulators won't approve it.

Why?................................................