Denied by Cigna—anyone have recommendations for alternatives?

[dj230]

that sucks, Cigna's policy is if you have any tumor or history of it you are automatically denied. 

[jerrymahoney]

3 hours ago, SammyJ said:

I would wonder in much older years, that, like CIGNA did, allow applications but then turned

it over to underwriting and they reject it outright or exclude so much that the policy is not worth having-

This is a rider to a life insurance policy that is only available to persons who have proved eligible for a life insurance policy. As to whether one can have a policy approved after a (onerous?) life insurance underwriting but then be denied by the same company for the health insurance rider, I do not know.

Edited September 29, 2022 by jerrymahoney

[SammyJ]

4 hours ago, Sheryl said:

I know for a fact that they do accept people of those ages, provided no serious pre-exisitng conditions. And they accept some with pre-existing conditions, but with exclusions.

 

The premiums are much higher for people that age, and this takes care of the  likelihood  of claims. Issues arise  when the individual applying is at above average risk for their age because of specific conditions.

 

And the problem of course is that few people reach such ages without having developed underlying health problems. So in practice nto many people that age can find insurance. But the age per se, is not a barrier for Cigna Global.

I certainly believe you, of course, to your experiences, but in dealing with CIGNA global my experiences, and those of several expat friends, who went to them, thinking they would be accepted=-=-all rejected??  So, just goes to show that there is not, it appears, a consistent practice.

[Sheryl]

40 minutes ago, SammyJ said:

I certainly believe you, of course, to your experiences, but in dealing with CIGNA global my experiences, and those of several expat friends, who went to them, thinking they would be accepted=-=-all rejected??  So, just goes to show that there is not, it appears, a consistent practice.

More likely they all had significant pre-existing conditions.

[Sheryl]

4 hours ago, dj230 said:

that sucks, Cigna's policy is if you have any tumor or history of it you are automatically denied. 

Most insurers will refuse to cover someone with a history of cancer. Hardly unique to Cigna.

[SammyJ]

35 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

More likely they all had significant pre-existing conditions.

Some yes, but not all--personally, in the US, no carrier would underwrite NEW coverage for an individual 70 plus, 80 plus, --again, individuals, but for most, who have qualified for Medicare, that is not an issue, otherwise they couldn't obtain or afford insurance.  Like I said, i believe your experiences, but would love to see the individuals who are 70, 80 plus still be underwritten with new coverage--that's what you have seen?  The simple reality is that even without fairly significant pre-existing conditions, insurance company underwrites know that anyone that age is a likely (yes, there are exceptions) ticking time bomb for health issues and to underwrite insurance--gosh, the premium would be exorbitant--and yes, a broker can help but nobody overrules the underwriter--I actually helped my friend talk directly to the CIGNA global broker we used, asking, why could the policy not be written with exclusions--btw-none of the pre-existing conditions involved cancer of any kind, but fairly common HBP, which so many seniors have--the broker apologized and was sympathetic, but said, it was not her decision--they simply did not want to assume the risk--and this friend was only 67 years old--go figure??

[jerrymahoney]

17 minutes ago, SammyJ said:

they simply did not want to assume the risk--and this friend was only 67 years old--go figure??

Your friend at the time of applying to CIGNA had no current healthcare insurance?

[SammyJ]

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Your friend at the time of applying to CIGNA had no current healthcare insurance?

My friend had a retirement benefit from his former company in the US--it covered health care until he reached medicare age--he paid for services here and then could file for reimbursement--but once, 65, he lost that benefit--decided to self insure when he researched (ph calls, emails,) directly with brokers and leading Thai insurance companies--many,m highly thought of--Pacific Cross, Aetna,. LUMA, AXA, CIGNA thailand--I think those were it--all were told, no new coverage age 65 and older--so, he went the self insure route, then got more information about trying CIGNA international/global--and was told that they would accept applications up to age 70--spoke to agent directly--but, now see that they say, they will accept applications even beyond 70, but accepting an application, which is then turned over to their underwriting dept, and being offered a contract of coverage are two different things.  So, my friend, now age 67, completed an application and submitted--expecting that there may be some exclusions for HBP---my friend, NEVER a bout with any kind of cancer--never had a heart attack or stroke, and HBP controlled well with medication--but, underwriters came back and declined to offer any coverage.  The agent had no explanation other than to say, sorry, underwriters make the decisions, not her.

Also, to think that any company will offer new insurance, not to an long time ongoing client, but new coverage to an individual 75, 80 or beyond defies simply how "FOR PROFIT" insurance companies operate--even without getting into any sophisticated explanation of what they consider, simple common sense dictates that offering an individual of 80 plus years health coverage is a non-starter--the premiums would have to be astronomical --sure the 80 year old may not mind paying 500,000 or more a year in premiums, knowing that they could have millions in coverage--well, of course, the underwriters know this---the do not assume the risk of millions in payout, when the odds of collecting enough in premiums over how many years make it good the carrier--and if there were multiple claims, etc--underwriter's job, not to assume unreasonable risk for their company,

 

So, again, NO, my friend did not have insurance when applied, and was denied--he has returned to the self insure plan.  Remember, that most coming to Thailand from the UK/EU have a national health program of some kind--in the US, there is Medicare for retirees--but neither Medicare nor national health help retirees here--strangely, US military and some US federal employees may use TRIcare, which will cover them here--good for them--I find it ridiculous that for an American citizen who has paid into Medicare one's entire working life, not to be able to access it regardless of where one lives.  Overall medical care here is less expensive and would save the medicare system money as opposed to having treatments, surgery, back in the US--seems unfair and makes no sense to lose such an important benefit that one has paid toward all their working lives??

[internationalism]

for over 65 there is pacific cross (health check up) and axa, Luma (they both don't have medical check up).

There are some thai companies (dhipaya), which do till 70, but won't extend beyond 80 or 85.

https://misterprakan.com/th/health/plans?gender=Male&age=66&lg=en&ipd=1&opdf=0&leadid=348157

 

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

8 hours ago, SammyJ said:

but once, 65, he lost that benefit--decided to self insure

I was approved for CIGNA Global at age 67 but, when I applied, they knew I had a 10 year no-claim track record with pre-AETNA BUPA Thailand. Some ask for current health insurance status and some don't.

Edited September 29, 2022 by jerrymahoney

[jerrymahoney]

8 hours ago, SammyJ said:

I find it ridiculous that for an American citizen who has paid into Medicare one's entire working life, not to be able to access it regardless of where one lives.

RAND  study from 2010

 

Extending U.S. Medicare to Mexico
Why It's Important to Consider and What Can Be Done

 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP314.html

[SammyJ]

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

RAND  study from 2010

 

Extending U.S. Medicare to Mexico
Why It's Important to Consider and What Can Be Done

 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP314.html

Yes, probably never in my lifetime--that study form 2010  a dozen years ago.  Also, the fact that Tricare is available to some US citizens, but not others????

[SammyJ]

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

I was approved for CIGNA Global at age 67 but, when I applied, they knew I had a 10 year no-claim track record with pre-AETNA BUPA Thailand. Some ask for current health insurance status and some don't.

I don't recall a question about current or previous insurance, but it might have been there and i just don't remember.  

[Sheryl]

14 hours ago, SammyJ said:

Some yes, but not all--personally, in the US, no carrier would underwrite NEW coverage for an individual 70 plus, 80 plus, --again, individuals, but for most, who have qualified for Medicare, that is not an issue, otherwise they couldn't obtain or afford insurance.  Like I said, i believe your experiences, but would love to see the individuals who are 70, 80 plus still be underwritten with new coverage--that's what you have seen?  The simple reality is that even without fairly significant pre-existing conditions, insurance company underwrites know that anyone that age is a likely (yes, there are exceptions) ticking time bomb for health issues and to underwrite insurance--gosh, the premium would be exorbitant--and yes, a broker can help but nobody overrules the underwriter--I actually helped my friend talk directly to the CIGNA global broker we used, asking, why could the policy not be written with exclusions--btw-none of the pre-existing conditions involved cancer of any kind, but fairly common HBP, which so many seniors have--the broker apologized and was sympathetic, but said, it was not her decision--they simply did not want to assume the risk--and this friend was only 67 years old--go figure??

Again, pre-existing condition.

 

Insuring a completely healthy 70/80 year old, and insuring a 67 year old with hypertension, are entirely different matters from an insurer's point of view.

 

The premiums at those older ages are indeed very high. This already factors in the age element.

 

Should also consider that what a friend tells you, and what was relevant in the health history to the insurer, may nto be the same.

 

I assure you, they do issue new policies regardless of age. But  not to seniors with risk factors beyond age.

[jerrymahoney]

45 minutes ago, SammyJ said:

I don't recall a question about current or previous insurance, but it might have been there and i just don't remember.  

If you have current insurance with a decent claim history, you don't have to wait for them to ask.

[SammyJ]

2 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Again, pre-existing condition.

 

Insuring a completely healthy 70/80 year old, and insuring a 67 year old with hypertension, are entirely different matters from an insurer's point of view.

 

The premiums at those older ages are indeed very high. This already factors in the age element.

 

Should also consider that what a friend tells you, and what was relevant in the health history to the insurer, may nto be the same.

 

I assure you, they do issue new policies regardless of age. But  not to seniors with risk factors beyond age.

Sorry, i just disagree--I have had extensive years working in the insurance industry, and don't question your medical knowledge---it wasn't just what a friend "told me"--I had seen his written application--it is just isn't common sense, nor risk to profit, to issue policies to much older senior, regardless of pre-existing condition--when you say seniors with "risk factors"  someone at 80 alone has a risk factor that insurance companies rarely, if ever, will take on for NEW coverage, continuing coverage, yes, but with extremely high premiums.  And, honestly, do we really know many 80 plus who don't have some kind of pre-existing conditions?  And those may be minor for a younger person but not for someone 80 plus. These situations are far more common in the US, then here, or in the UK/EU due to national health--in the US, minus any national health, young and old, seeking private insurance (again for older, depending upon qualifying, or not, for Medicare) denials are not uncommon.

Besides CIGNA, from my direct contact with brokers and company agents, Pacific Cross, Aetna, LUMA, CIGNA thailand, AXA, all stated clearly, NO new policies written for those 65 and older--why are they doing that--they simply don't even want to consider and play the game with what pre-existing conditions one may have--they don't assume the risk as their analysis tells them overall it's a financial loser for them.

[Sheryl]

26 minutes ago, SammyJ said:

it is just isn't common sense, nor risk to profit, to issue policies to much older senior, regardless of pre-existing condition--when you say seniors with "risk factors"  someone at 80 alone has a risk factor that insurance companies rarely, if ever, will take on for NEW coverage, continuing coverage, yes, but with extremely high premiums. 

Never suggested anyplace was issuing policies "to much older seniors regardless of pre-existing condition".  Rather, what I said, and what is true, is that Cigna will issue new policies to older seniors provided they do not have significant pre-existing conditions. And yes, of course, that is a minority of older seniors.  However unlike many other insurers, Cigna does not treat age itself as a factor for exclusion.

 

Referring here ti Cigna Global, I don't know what policy is for Cigna Thailand but I doubt it goes up to age 99/100 like Cigna Global does.

[SammyJ]

2 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Never suggested anyplace was issuing policies "to much older seniors regardless of pre-existing condition".  Rather, what I said, and what is true, is that Cigna will issue new policies to older seniors provided they do not have significant pre-existing conditions. And yes, of course, that is a minority of older seniors.  However unlike many other insurers, Cigna does not treat age itself as a factor for exclusion.

 

Referring here ti Cigna Global, I don't know what policy is for Cigna Thailand but I doubt it goes up to age 99/100 like Cigna Global does.

While I am not sure about "not treating age itself as a factor for exclusion", of course, they must--of course, they would never reveal how many more elder seniors they signed up, but do we really think most everyone else cuts off at 65, but Cigna is going to sign up those much older--again, pre-existing conditions or not--it just goes against the "for profit" model under which they operate--knowing the likelihood of payout out far more than ever making in premiums.

 

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.