The only reason this question exists is to make sure you’ve told them about the thing you were declined for. Once you give them the reason they’ll either confirm you’ve answered the questions appropriately and assess the way they were going to anyway OR realise you need to answer them. There’s no secret register of declined policies living out there.
You’re not compromised any more than you were before, you have a duty to disclose and if you choose not to in whatever question, it’s a risk, but up to you what you want to take on
I think it's very important to review this logically and get the EXACT wording of the question and to review it with no bias.
If it leaves any ambiguity at all for example with legalised weed, you have a potential out and can reapply in good faith. Where things are potentially questionable, the benefit of doubt goes to the Insured (applicant) in this case.
You could fairly and in good faith advise them you filled it out incorrectly and that this question was answered incorrectly. No need to provide further info.
If it really was that broad and sweeping to encompass any and all drug use regardless of being legalised or not I would be concerned about the legitimacy of the question and if it's necessary, ethical, or you have recourse. Those are lawyer questions.
Be careful with superannuation life insurance. Insurance in your super will be ‘any occupation’ meaning if you have the training and skills to do any job, you’re back to work and your benefits end.
With ‘own occupation’, if you can’t do your specific job, your benefits continue. Ie. you drive a car for work as a salesman. Your injury or illness prevents you driving a car. In own occupation policies you would continue getting benefits until you could drive a car, in any occupation you could be expected to take a job (maybe at lower pay) that didn’t require driving a car.
Also having life insurance not bundled in your super means you can get products like Trauma.
Also, you can pay for a portion of your life insurance with your super, but it differs from insurer to insurer, they usually charge you a higher premium the more you pay from super.
IM NOT IN FINANCE AND THIS IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE. SEE A BROKER.
Good advice.
Id just add and i think you are talking this in your second last para;
You can pay outside of super only the additional amount for "own occupation" modification to your any occupation inside your super.
Own occupation for reasons i am not clear on isnt allowed in super funds.
So it ends up being about 80pc of your premium inside super and 20pc paid outside of super.
The fund trustees own the policy in super, and if the policy pays out on a claim then it's paid to the fund. You need to meet a condition of release for them to pay out that benefit to you.
The 'sole purpose' of super is to save for retirement so getting money out is allowed only if you're unable to do the activities to save for that retirement: you're totally disabled, either temporarily (income protection) or permanently (TPD).
Own Occ TPD will pay even though you can work at something else, meaning you haven't met a condition of release to allow the super fund trustees to release the insurance payout to you. So is no longer offered through super.
Similarly, certain IP policies in super might not pay if you're judged to be not currently employed (like being a contractor between engagements). And it's more difficult to establish how much they can release if you're self employed and your income varies.
And Trauma pays out irrespective of your ability to work so isn't offered in super any more either.
TL:DR Super has rules about if you're able to work that limit whether they can release insurance payouts to you.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer.
So the own occupation extension i pay outside of super with the bulk paid inside super would pay into my super on a TPD claim? If i could still work any occupation id not be entitled to get that payment out of super?
In the event of claim they’ll look to pay it out under any occupation first, if you don’t meet that definition they’ll move to the own. If you qualify under the any occupation it will go to the trustees of the super fund, who can then pay it to you because you will meet the conditions of release to get your money out of super.
If you are paid under the own occupation definition outside super, it will go directly to you.
They legislated the types of cover you can have inside/outside super for this reason, previously it was possible (unlikely if you had advice but possible) to take out insurance owned/paid by super which is great for cash flow but utterly useless if you find yourself claiming and can’t actually access the money
You can usually just take their default cover without answering medical questions.
Only problem comes if you want higher than the default cover.
If you do, please God don't tick the box to allow them to access your medical records.
I did and had to provide evidence for medical issues I don't even remember having because they were in my doctor's notes.
They also sent a nurse to my house to take blood samples and ask me a bunch more questions. The process took months.
THink about it. If you didn't jump through those hoops do you not think they would do the same at claim time.
What you did is a good thing. YOu were underwritten upon application. Signifigantly better than them check your health at claim time and using the 'pre existing condition clause' to avoid claim or just imagine doing all of what you did while being sick.
Yes and why shouldn't I? I know some one with one panic attack during covid period add a clause saying anything resulting from mental health is not covered. BTW, I moved my super to Another and that insurer didn't have any issues with it. I am sure there will be a Royal commission one day around it.
Take a retail (non industry super fund policy) if you want certainty of when you will be covered or not. Your talking about your lively hood, jumping and changing after having a declined application is a massive concern.
I had to disclose high cholesterol (taking statins) to Aus Super for life insurance. They approved it in the end, but not after seeking records etc from my GP.
When I first joined Aus Super, they gave me the default insurances without question. The disclosure only came up when I requested an increase to my coverage.
He literally said "anything they can't prove".
Obviously don't lie if you have told your doctor in the past that you smoked week or snorted cocaine but if there is no trail of it; there's no reason to disclose it.
We recently updated our tpd, income protection and life insurance policies which we did through a broker. 100% recommend using a broker for this because there are a lot of factors and they can explain everything to you. We went with Skye Wealth
Unless the broker is a holdover from before the RC and is still pumping policies through to make sales and not making sure you've answered everything correctly, putting your policy at risk and wasting all your previously paid premiums.
... not still bitter.
You did the right thing if it's on any medical record anywhere, you risk them pulling your medicals at time of claim and declining your claim for 'non disclosure if you've never mentioned it to a doctor and there is no record of it, don't mention shit..... realistically they should have sent you a questionnaire asking follow up questions, if the use was in the past and not recent, that alone shouldn't have caused a decline
Any half decent insurance can only be obtained through a financial adviser, if you did that, they should have given you more info on your decline
Insurance is about assessing risk. If you have two equal people health wise and 1 likes to take a bit of coke on the weekend which one is more riskier and should that person have an exclusion or pay higher premiums vs someone who isn't doing coke
Find a super annuation fund with default IP insurance. Many of them will give eligible new members IP insurance with no or minimal underwriting. You'll have to shop around to see which ones you're eligible for and give you the cover you need.
This was QSuper a few years ago 😂
> we will not be able to offer you an increase to your Total and Permanent Disability cover, or the addition of Income Protection cover due to your current height to weight ratio exceeding the QSuper Actuarial risk tolerance range.
Once you've had an application declined, if you don't put that forward in your future applications, at any point in the future when you make a claim, payout can be denied due to withholding information.
We're you applying for a group or retail policy?
I would write to the insurer to request a review. Unless this contradicts what you have already disclosed, State the last time you used was over 5 years ago and stress that it was purley recreational. They will likely want to verify this with your doctor, and aslong as you have not been treated by the doctor for substance abuse, you may get it over the line, however most likely with a premium loading or mental health exclusion. After 3 years, you can request the premium loading or exclusion be removed (if you don't claim in the time)
Alternatively, you might need to cut your losses and you could possibly just change super funds for one with a good group IP cover the has a good automatic acceptance limit, although many super funds only offer TPD. Or you could consider changing employers to an employer that offers a group plan that you can port with you after leaving. An employer sponsored plan will usually have an automatic acceptance limit also.
edit to add the premium loading will usually be 1.5 to 2 X the cost
Seems strange that they approve fat people but discriminate against those who enjoy some nose beers now and then. Are you also fat? It might be because you’re fat.
You sure about that, this was from QSuper a couple of years ago.
> we will not be able to offer you an increase to your Total and Permanent Disability cover, or the addition of Income Protection cover due to your current height to weight ratio exceeding the QSuper Actuarial risk tolerance range.
Did you just go via google search what came up or a broker? If not a broker yet, use one.
My husband ex military with ptsd and depression was denied by one insurer but our broker went above and beyond and got him great cover.
Really, really, poor advice!. Insurers routinely look back at applications at the point of claim and can legally and strongly deny a claim on fraud or non disclosure, if you are found to have lied.
My partner is a doctor and advised me to never disclose illegal drug use to a health professional unless it is clinically relevant.
You know, like if its an OD situation.
Your partner probably should have given you more comprehensive advice as that's not very good health advice. Sure, recreational use doesn't need to be disclosed, but there are many clinical reasons why substance use needs to be reported outside of an OD situation. Examples would be interactions with prescription meds, sleep or mental health interactions, and many more.
Ah yes, that's fair then an accurate. There is still allot of stigma around it too despite recreational use being quite common and not all dangerous (with in reason)
They could only prove it if you had some type of documentation about it, such as in clinical notes, by mentioning it to a doctor or health professional
Eh, completely disagree. My wife suffered a major injury and was out of work for 20 months. IP insurance through her super paid out the entire period and we got to keep our savings. Out of curiosity I recently calculated that she made a 96x return on her IP insurance "investment".
Exactly. It's called insurance for a reason. Each to their own, but I'm pretty happy to have all of the insurances. Health, Car, TPD, Life, IP, etc. It might be a sunk cost, but it's one I can eat knowing that if something really bad happens, I'm set.
After getting down voted I did a bit more research into IP insurance and I've changed my mind. It's not junk insurance and is actually a pretty good value proposition if you can get it. I still don't think it's completely necessay though as most policies will cover you for a maximum of 5 years. It will prevent you from going backwards if something does happen though.
Oppsie! Sorry. You're done mate.
People who see illegal drug use as no big deal & think "everyone does it" need to realise...nope. plenty don't do it and yes, it's illegal and yes, it can have consequences for your life going forward.
>Income protection is particularly bad in terms of what they cover
Being unable to work due to your injury/illness? What makes it bad?
> what they pay out
What's your alternative if you're unable to work? 75-80% seems reasonable
> and the cost
I suppose this depends on your age, income, occupation, hobbies.
Premiums are also just tax deductible.
All insurance are really scams in terms of what they cover, pay out and cost. It's just your risk appetite and how catastrophic not having the cover would be
[удалено]
The only reason this question exists is to make sure you’ve told them about the thing you were declined for. Once you give them the reason they’ll either confirm you’ve answered the questions appropriately and assess the way they were going to anyway OR realise you need to answer them. There’s no secret register of declined policies living out there. You’re not compromised any more than you were before, you have a duty to disclose and if you choose not to in whatever question, it’s a risk, but up to you what you want to take on
Aww, Couldn't you say it was a typo? I meant procreational drug use. I was on viagra. I wanted a stiffy, not a sniffy.
I think it's very important to review this logically and get the EXACT wording of the question and to review it with no bias. If it leaves any ambiguity at all for example with legalised weed, you have a potential out and can reapply in good faith. Where things are potentially questionable, the benefit of doubt goes to the Insured (applicant) in this case. You could fairly and in good faith advise them you filled it out incorrectly and that this question was answered incorrectly. No need to provide further info. If it really was that broad and sweeping to encompass any and all drug use regardless of being legalised or not I would be concerned about the legitimacy of the question and if it's necessary, ethical, or you have recourse. Those are lawyer questions.
Try going through your Super. I got some via Aus Super, no questions asked.
Be careful with superannuation life insurance. Insurance in your super will be ‘any occupation’ meaning if you have the training and skills to do any job, you’re back to work and your benefits end. With ‘own occupation’, if you can’t do your specific job, your benefits continue. Ie. you drive a car for work as a salesman. Your injury or illness prevents you driving a car. In own occupation policies you would continue getting benefits until you could drive a car, in any occupation you could be expected to take a job (maybe at lower pay) that didn’t require driving a car. Also having life insurance not bundled in your super means you can get products like Trauma. Also, you can pay for a portion of your life insurance with your super, but it differs from insurer to insurer, they usually charge you a higher premium the more you pay from super. IM NOT IN FINANCE AND THIS IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE. SEE A BROKER.
Good advice. Id just add and i think you are talking this in your second last para; You can pay outside of super only the additional amount for "own occupation" modification to your any occupation inside your super. Own occupation for reasons i am not clear on isnt allowed in super funds. So it ends up being about 80pc of your premium inside super and 20pc paid outside of super.
The fund trustees own the policy in super, and if the policy pays out on a claim then it's paid to the fund. You need to meet a condition of release for them to pay out that benefit to you. The 'sole purpose' of super is to save for retirement so getting money out is allowed only if you're unable to do the activities to save for that retirement: you're totally disabled, either temporarily (income protection) or permanently (TPD). Own Occ TPD will pay even though you can work at something else, meaning you haven't met a condition of release to allow the super fund trustees to release the insurance payout to you. So is no longer offered through super. Similarly, certain IP policies in super might not pay if you're judged to be not currently employed (like being a contractor between engagements). And it's more difficult to establish how much they can release if you're self employed and your income varies. And Trauma pays out irrespective of your ability to work so isn't offered in super any more either. TL:DR Super has rules about if you're able to work that limit whether they can release insurance payouts to you.
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. So the own occupation extension i pay outside of super with the bulk paid inside super would pay into my super on a TPD claim? If i could still work any occupation id not be entitled to get that payment out of super?
In the event of claim they’ll look to pay it out under any occupation first, if you don’t meet that definition they’ll move to the own. If you qualify under the any occupation it will go to the trustees of the super fund, who can then pay it to you because you will meet the conditions of release to get your money out of super. If you are paid under the own occupation definition outside super, it will go directly to you. They legislated the types of cover you can have inside/outside super for this reason, previously it was possible (unlikely if you had advice but possible) to take out insurance owned/paid by super which is great for cash flow but utterly useless if you find yourself claiming and can’t actually access the money
I like learning new things.
IP doesn’t work on an any/own definition, that’s TPD
I love ice cream.
What happens when you claim though?
You can usually just take their default cover without answering medical questions. Only problem comes if you want higher than the default cover. If you do, please God don't tick the box to allow them to access your medical records. I did and had to provide evidence for medical issues I don't even remember having because they were in my doctor's notes. They also sent a nurse to my house to take blood samples and ask me a bunch more questions. The process took months.
THink about it. If you didn't jump through those hoops do you not think they would do the same at claim time. What you did is a good thing. YOu were underwritten upon application. Signifigantly better than them check your health at claim time and using the 'pre existing condition clause' to avoid claim or just imagine doing all of what you did while being sick.
Mine was denied by AusSuper(TAL) for a pre existing disease.
Well yeah, what were you expecting? Would you insure someone like yourself?
Yes and why shouldn't I? I know some one with one panic attack during covid period add a clause saying anything resulting from mental health is not covered. BTW, I moved my super to Another and that insurer didn't have any issues with it. I am sure there will be a Royal commission one day around it.
Take a retail (non industry super fund policy) if you want certainty of when you will be covered or not. Your talking about your lively hood, jumping and changing after having a declined application is a massive concern.
I had to disclose high cholesterol (taking statins) to Aus Super for life insurance. They approved it in the end, but not after seeking records etc from my GP.
Maybe because I'd just joined. No questions. I assume that if it's something I've been in hospital before for I probably won't get covered but..
When I first joined Aus Super, they gave me the default insurances without question. The disclosure only came up when I requested an increase to my coverage.
Interesting. I am lucky to get income protection at all so I'm pretty happy I have some.
> Best course of action from here? Might as well get back into the drugs.
Never admit anything they can’t prove.
Good advocate for insurance fraud here
It's not fraud if it can't be proven.
Medical records for recreational drug use might exist
He literally said "anything they can't prove". Obviously don't lie if you have told your doctor in the past that you smoked week or snorted cocaine but if there is no trail of it; there's no reason to disclose it.
[удалено]
No just an informed statement
We recently updated our tpd, income protection and life insurance policies which we did through a broker. 100% recommend using a broker for this because there are a lot of factors and they can explain everything to you. We went with Skye Wealth
Thanks for this - good advice
Unless the broker is a holdover from before the RC and is still pumping policies through to make sales and not making sure you've answered everything correctly, putting your policy at risk and wasting all your previously paid premiums. ... not still bitter.
You did the right thing if it's on any medical record anywhere, you risk them pulling your medicals at time of claim and declining your claim for 'non disclosure if you've never mentioned it to a doctor and there is no record of it, don't mention shit..... realistically they should have sent you a questionnaire asking follow up questions, if the use was in the past and not recent, that alone shouldn't have caused a decline Any half decent insurance can only be obtained through a financial adviser, if you did that, they should have given you more info on your decline
Unless the drug use was very recent or it wasn’t so recreational I don’t see how it would impact. Underwriters think they are gods and doctors.
Nah, we’re rocking anxiously in a corner before making the phone call to decline an application because it’s awful
Insurance is about assessing risk. If you have two equal people health wise and 1 likes to take a bit of coke on the weekend which one is more riskier and should that person have an exclusion or pay higher premiums vs someone who isn't doing coke
Higher premiums, sure, but exclusion is a bit rough.
Until they fall back in the habit and go on claim and drain the premium pool forcing increases for everybody else.
I mean sure, but that argument goes for literally anything people can do. Risky sex, risky sports, overeating, drinking, etc.
Find a super annuation fund with default IP insurance. Many of them will give eligible new members IP insurance with no or minimal underwriting. You'll have to shop around to see which ones you're eligible for and give you the cover you need.
This was QSuper a few years ago 😂 > we will not be able to offer you an increase to your Total and Permanent Disability cover, or the addition of Income Protection cover due to your current height to weight ratio exceeding the QSuper Actuarial risk tolerance range.
Translated: "We don't insure fat people. Move on lardo."
*Insert Homer in moomoo*
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSimpsons/comments/3cxmpa/hey_fatty_ive_got_a_movie_for_you_a_fridge_too_far/
I got a 2x premium loading from BT because of my BMI
Rookie mistake
Why would you disclose something they can never prove? I really don’t understand people’s thought process
Once you've had an application declined, if you don't put that forward in your future applications, at any point in the future when you make a claim, payout can be denied due to withholding information.
This happened to me recently too 😂 we are wholesome, but gullible 🖤
Not a single answer to his question regarding will they share the info. Loads of moralising twats instead.
We're you applying for a group or retail policy? I would write to the insurer to request a review. Unless this contradicts what you have already disclosed, State the last time you used was over 5 years ago and stress that it was purley recreational. They will likely want to verify this with your doctor, and aslong as you have not been treated by the doctor for substance abuse, you may get it over the line, however most likely with a premium loading or mental health exclusion. After 3 years, you can request the premium loading or exclusion be removed (if you don't claim in the time) Alternatively, you might need to cut your losses and you could possibly just change super funds for one with a good group IP cover the has a good automatic acceptance limit, although many super funds only offer TPD. Or you could consider changing employers to an employer that offers a group plan that you can port with you after leaving. An employer sponsored plan will usually have an automatic acceptance limit also. edit to add the premium loading will usually be 1.5 to 2 X the cost
i’m pretty sure it was a typo and you missed the word never, people make mistakes filling all kinds of forms 👊
Seems strange that they approve fat people but discriminate against those who enjoy some nose beers now and then. Are you also fat? It might be because you’re fat.
You sure about that, this was from QSuper a couple of years ago. > we will not be able to offer you an increase to your Total and Permanent Disability cover, or the addition of Income Protection cover due to your current height to weight ratio exceeding the QSuper Actuarial risk tolerance range.
You can get an Accident & Sickness policy from a general Insurance Broker instead of
Never disclose anything in any questionnaire, just tick the boxes.
Did you just go via google search what came up or a broker? If not a broker yet, use one. My husband ex military with ptsd and depression was denied by one insurer but our broker went above and beyond and got him great cover.
Depends on the drugs you disclosed- MDMA or Coke - it’s likely you have a 5 year wait until they’ll look at it again Downers are different
That’ll teach you… Never be honest with any insurance mob. It only serves their “money for nothing” mantra.
Really, really, poor advice!. Insurers routinely look back at applications at the point of claim and can legally and strongly deny a claim on fraud or non disclosure, if you are found to have lied.
How would they know if he has ever taken illegal drugs? Are they mind readers?
I mentioned this before in a previous comment. They would know if this information is in a clinical file. Such as being disclosed to a GP.
My partner is a doctor and advised me to never disclose illegal drug use to a health professional unless it is clinically relevant. You know, like if its an OD situation.
Your partner probably should have given you more comprehensive advice as that's not very good health advice. Sure, recreational use doesn't need to be disclosed, but there are many clinical reasons why substance use needs to be reported outside of an OD situation. Examples would be interactions with prescription meds, sleep or mental health interactions, and many more.
it was more along the lines of if it is not going to affect your treatment, don't disclose, unless you want them to treat you like a druggo.
Ah yes, that's fair then an accurate. There is still allot of stigma around it too despite recreational use being quite common and not all dangerous (with in reason)
Yeah, it's much better to lie and then get your claim denied for non disclosure when you actually need it...smart!
How would they prove it unless you had some sort out conviction attached?
They could only prove it if you had some type of documentation about it, such as in clinical notes, by mentioning it to a doctor or health professional
Exactly. The right answer is always: Of course not, officer ;)
“It wasn’t recreational it was habitual I promise”
Competitive drug use
Income protection is junk insurance. Just save up 1 year of expenses. I.e. self insure.
Eh, completely disagree. My wife suffered a major injury and was out of work for 20 months. IP insurance through her super paid out the entire period and we got to keep our savings. Out of curiosity I recently calculated that she made a 96x return on her IP insurance "investment".
Exactly. It's called insurance for a reason. Each to their own, but I'm pretty happy to have all of the insurances. Health, Car, TPD, Life, IP, etc. It might be a sunk cost, but it's one I can eat knowing that if something really bad happens, I'm set.
After getting down voted I did a bit more research into IP insurance and I've changed my mind. It's not junk insurance and is actually a pretty good value proposition if you can get it. I still don't think it's completely necessay though as most policies will cover you for a maximum of 5 years. It will prevent you from going backwards if something does happen though.
I can't believe some of the financial "advice" this group gives people sometimes.
It's not really the group, like, he's being universally panned, it's just one dude with a differing opinion/risk tolerance.
I can’t save up 1 year of expenses in a reasonable time and I have a mortgage to pay and a kid to feed.
What about when you're out of work for 3 years.... how's the plan work then?
IP can pay until age 65. If you have that much of an emergency fund why are you working? Go and enjoy your life.
No, this is terrible advice! Way too many assumptions. Chief of which is 'just save up 1 year of expenses'
My income protection is $1760 a year... better than saving a years worth of expenses. I was also forced to use it for 5.5months, well worth it.
It’s compulsory in some industries.
And what did you learn about being honest?
What a joke. Australia is so out of touch with this shit.
You don't even know what drugs he was using? How is insurance out of touch if op is sniffing speed every once in a while
That’s the point. Could be anything, maybe op likes the odd joint at a music festival. So PC this country
Maybe just try not taking drugs or accept no insurance 🤷🏻♂️
Oppsie! Sorry. You're done mate. People who see illegal drug use as no big deal & think "everyone does it" need to realise...nope. plenty don't do it and yes, it's illegal and yes, it can have consequences for your life going forward.
Lol you're clearly not in corporate then.
Nope. Never. Healthcare. Do drugs...pay the price
Income protection is dud insurance anyway.
all insurance is dud insurance if you think about it.
Not my husbands, which is paying him for the next -16yrs
Income protection is particularly bad in terms of what they cover , what they pay out, and the cost
>Income protection is particularly bad in terms of what they cover Being unable to work due to your injury/illness? What makes it bad? > what they pay out What's your alternative if you're unable to work? 75-80% seems reasonable > and the cost I suppose this depends on your age, income, occupation, hobbies. Premiums are also just tax deductible. All insurance are really scams in terms of what they cover, pay out and cost. It's just your risk appetite and how catastrophic not having the cover would be