Insurance Blog: 7/26/09

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

UK Health Insurance- From the Cradle to the Queue

Health and Wealth! Isn't that what eveyone drinks to?
A look at UK Health Insurance and National Wealth.

Britain was still reeling from World War Two when the National Health Service was launched in 1948, sweeping in an era of social change and expectation.
Gone were the days of ‘bring out your dead’ if you couldn’t afford to pay.
Despite many changes over the sixty one years and its recent flirtations with Private Health Insurance companies, the so called postcode lottery system and other structural difficulties, the NHS has remained true to the ethos of access for all.
No system is perfect and spatial differences in levels of access and quality of care still need to be radically addressed.

In the UK when the National Health Service was finally implemented in 1948 as part of Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee's 'cradle to the grave' welfare state.
A nationwide system of free healthcare was finally launched by Aneurin Bevan the then Minister of Health, which promised us access to health care cover and treatment for all.
The cradle to the grave speech mentality had set the standards for social healthcare and access to treatment for all.
To date, despite its recent structural changes, and despite the healthy criticism and debate that the subject of the NHS always brings, if you look at the system in performance and social cohesion you have to say that it appears to work much better as a form of national health insurance than do comparative systems in so called developed countries. This development in healthcare is always a subject of great debate in the lead up to a General Election, and no doubt will take greater stage in the months to come

Everyone working in the UK has to pay National Insurance contributions as part of their income in order for the system to work, and facilitating everyone in the UK with medical cover.
However National Insurance contributions are not a good solution for a number of reasons.
They increase the costs of labour.
By definition this makes them inflationary.
The costs of production are passed onto the populace en masse
The contributions are by no means equitable
Many sections of the population are able to virtually opt out of the contribution system
The NHS is heavily subsided by the tax contributions of the healthy and wealthy forty percent plus payers.

Whether the United States Government is able to take what could be seen as a major left shift to achieve better social cohesion and consequently improved GDP, remains to be seen.
Are the workers prepared to subsidize the shirkers and the misfortunate? There needs to exist a situation both economically, socially and mentality, of desperation and hope that existed in the UK in 1945, in order to see a fiscal response to the current situation, biting the healthcare bullet that the USA is so afraid to bite. Providing the ultimate National Safety Net!

The States is in the difficult situation of how to deal with chronic sickness, the recession, the role of PMI as an underwriter of GDP and the political influence and lobbying power of the large Health Insurance companies. Rather you than me Barrack!

Gordon Brown should note that Private Health Insurance became one of the first things people were encouraged to buy when her who’s name shall not be spoken came to power in 1979.

Labels: Barack Obama, Gordon Brown, health insurance, health insurance quotes, medical insurance, NHS, PMI, private health insurance, Private Medical Insurance, UK government

Monday, July 27, 2009

Mortgage insurance – why be vulnerable?

Burgesses Insurance News has published an interesting article today looking at the rationale behind the purchasing of insurance as a protection vehicle, and questions why the public are disinterested and can't be bothered when it comes to purchasing Mortgage Protection for the largest investment of all - a house!...........

It it just that the public doesn't appreciate the risks? Until it is too late....

Mortgage insurance – why be vulnerable?

First Published Burgesses.com July 27th, 2009 in Mortgage Insurance |

Most people are thoroughly accustomed to one of the most basic principles of insurance – if something is valuable, it is probably worth insuring. Although the principle might be widely recognised in many other areas of domestic life, however, for some reason it does not seem to be so readily grasped when it comes to mortgage insurance.

Only an estimated 25% of the nation’s 11.7 million mortgage borrowers are believed to have arranged this potentially indispensable for of insurance. Given the sheer value of the mortgaged homes, not to mention the dire consequences of defaulting on the mortgage repayments, the statistic is surprising to say the least. Some three-quarters of borrowers seem to be leaving themselves vulnerable to the most common risks to their incomes – accidents, illnesses and unemployment – and with the loss of an income, the ability to continue their mortgage repayments.

The penalties for defaulting on the mortgage repayments, of course, can be serious indeed. In the worst cases, it can lead to repossession of the home itself by a mortgage lender determined to recover the outstanding debt. But even if some arrangement can be reached with the lender, the homeowner is still vulnerable. If mortgage repayments cannot be made, the home might have to be sold – even though the current state of the housing market might mean that such a sale realises less than the outstanding mortgage debt. At the very least, the late or non-payment of the mortgage instalments as they fall due will attract adverse credit reports on the borrower’s file. This will make borrowing – or any other form of credit – more expensive to arrange in the future, if the facility is extended to the individual at all.

This is a vulnerability that the homeowner can easily avoid with mortgage insurance. The insurance can offer complete protection for the mortgage repayments in the event that the policy holder meets with an accident or suffers an illness that prevents normal earnings from work. The same protection is also extended if the policy holder loses his or her job through compulsory redundancy. In any of these events, such a policy will pay out an insured benefit from which the mortgage repayments can continue to be paid – in many instances, directly to the mortgage lender concerned, if needs be.

Once in payment, the mortgage insurance monthly benefit payments ensure that the mortgage is repaid every month that the policy holder remains incapacitated for work, involuntarily unemployed, or for up to a typical maximum period of 12 months, whichever is the shorter time. Taking up the option offered by some policies, payouts can be made over an even longer period and extended for up to a maximum of 24 months, if an additional premium is paid.

Labels: mortgage, mortgage insurance, mortgage payment protection, mortgage payment protection insurance, mortgage protection, mortgage protection insurance, mppi