Do you believe in insurance?

[spidermike007]

As minimally as possible. I consider nearly all insurance companies to be gangland mafia sorts who will do absolutely anything they can to weasel out of payment. I do have good car insurance, I do have accident insurance. Both make sense, and that's about it.

 

I gave up my health insurance over a decade ago, as the premiums got stupid. I've been saving that money which is now a considerable sum. I figure if something happens to me I can take care of it out of pocket, and if it's very serious I'll just shed the mortar coil, see you, bye bye. 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

I would just like to point out that automobile insurance can play a pivotal role in reinforcing safe driving. What distinguishes Thailand from many countries in the West in terms of road safety are police enforcement of traffic safety (i.e., ticketing for moving violations, and suspension and revocation of driver's licenses in the event of serious infractions.)

 

But behind this police enforcement are two cornerstones of enforcement which Thailand also lacks. First, it is sometimes difficult to recover damages in the event of death, injury and property loss because the minimum limits of insurance required are frequently inadequate to fully compensate the injured party, and when this is the case, even if civil damages are ordered by the court, it is difficult to recover the damages in real life. So there's a certain amount of impunity about repercussions in the event you cause an accident. If Thailand increased and enforced the minimum liability insurance required, this would help alleviate this problem to a certain degree. The other way that insurance can serve as a means of improving traffic safety is by having a driver's point system where drivers are dinged for accidents and moving violations. As the number of points increases, the cost of insurance goes up and in some cases becomes prohibitively expensive to insure, thus providing a major incentive for drivers to avoid accidents and observe traffic safety regulations.

 

So insurance can play an important role in building a culture of road safety.

 

Sounds good, but increasing the minimum liability increases the price, which reduces the number of poor people who buy it, which drives the price up further. I think this would likely exasperate the problem. 

 

The problem is that people with no significant assets understand liability insurance to be a waste of their money.  "You can't get blood from a turnip."

 

It's more and more the same in the US. 

 

 

[BigStar]

3 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

This is why I'm sceptical to take out ANY insurance !

 

 

Travel insurance is cheap and all tourists should have it. They should also read the policy to see what's covered and what isn't.

 

Motorbike insurance above the standard gov't cover, yes, that's an excellent idea. I have it.

 

Otherwise, pay for int'l health insurance (see forum threads) and/or have a few million at hand for self-insurance and know your gov't hospital well. Alternatively, work a year before you're 60 in Thailand and get on SSO. Fantastic deal. 

 

[KannikaP]

1 hour ago, noobexpat said:

 

No doubt.

2 x nil rate bands plus residence nil rate band means husband/wife with children have an estate of £775k before tax is due.

 

Is it not One Mill?

[scubascuba3]

I've claimed 3 times on travel insurance from UK and they agreed to pay quickly, 1 was biggish, 2 were small. 

 

Health insurance is fraught with danger of claim being denied at the worse possible time, often because claims are big value.

 

➡️ I trust travel insurance not health insurance

[riclag]

Only if its free or forced to carry it(Mandatory).

[Lemsta69]

4 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

But again what sparked my interest was ANOTHER story this morning I saw , a Australian man who is expecting a baby soon took off to BALI by himself and is currently in ICU in Bali after a moped accident

 

Apparently insurance was refused .

 

Why would any insurance in their right mind provide coverage for reckless behaviour such as described above?

[stevenl]

4 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

I didn't think of that .

They probably would use that against you , that there was no alcohol test to determine

I wonder if that's somewhere in the fine print that none reads 

It would depend on the policy, but standard policy would be that alcohol in play would have to be proven. Not the other way round.

[novacova]

3 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No they do not, insurance policies have "policy conditions" that are, by law, not in small print.   Anyone who does not check them and then expects any/every claim to be paid out automatically is just daft.

👍 Insurance policies are contracts, an agreement, I’ve signed a lot of different contracts, insurance policies are no different. Read and comprehend before making an argument.

[Liverpool Lou]

46 minutes ago, novacova said:

4 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

No they do not, insurance policies have "policy conditions" that are, by law, not in small print.   Anyone who does not check them and then expects any/every claim to be paid out automatically is just daft.

👍 Insurance policies are contracts, an agreement, I’ve signed a lot of different contracts, insurance policies are no different. Read and comprehend before making an argument.

What have I posted here that makes you think that I do not understand an industry in which I spent many years?   Specifically.

[noobexpat]

2 hours ago, KannikaP said:

Is it not One Mill?

 

Yes if the home is setup as joint tenants, then the RNRB is transferable, so 2 x 175k plus 2 x £325k = £1m. Which is the most common scenario to be fair.

 

If its setup as tenants in common, then first death 'wills' their share to children. So then 2nd death is only 1 x 175k. People do it this way as high value estates can lose RNRB due to tapering.

 

 

[gearbox]

5 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Fair point. The problem is that they have that rule in Australia where if you are over 30 and you don't get health insurance the premiums go up by 2 per cent each year. I haven't look that much into it but as far as I can tell if I stopped, then wanted to start later at say 60, I have to pay the going rate plus say 30 x 2 = 60 per cent extra. When you are over 60 you are most likely to need it most. The other thing is I have an old plan that is a bit better than the latest ones in terms of coverage and price so if starting a fresh they are a fair bit more expensive too.. 

If you make more than X amount of $ in Australia you are going to have Medicare surcharge if you don't take private health cover. For income of $180k plus the surcharge is bigger than the private cover premiums.

 

I think Lil Johnny introduced it.

[Yellowtail]

2 hours ago, Lemsta69 said:

 

Why would any insurance in their right mind provide coverage for reckless behaviour such as described above?

Government mandates.

[NoDisplayName]

7 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

But again what sparked my interest was ANOTHER story this morning I saw , a Australian man who is expecting a baby soon took off to BALI by himself and is currently in ICU in Bali after a moped accident

 

“I tried to get him travel insurance that would cover scooters, but there was nothing,” she said.

 

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/aussie-father-fighting-for-his-life-after-serious-scooter-accident-in-bali/news-story/86c3b39966c8845a9a547f8247a2a181

 

Our daughter Leah, Kevin's wife, who is 32 weeks pregnant, has made the rush decision with Kevin's father and brother, to fly over there to be by his side for few days.

 

....we are doing a Go Fund Me

[Liverpool Lou]

5 hours ago, Lacessit said:

One is paying out now  a premium which has a certain purchasing power. With inflation, in 20 - 30 years time ( or whatever ) the purchasing power of what the insurance company pays out on the policy declines to the point where it is probably only enough to buy a secondhand car.

 

An insurance company salesman in his cups told me when he sells a life policy, his commission was the first year premiums. Insurance companies would not be paying out that kind of money unless the sector was very profitable.

Neither of those is "a scam".    Pre-determined premiums are paid for a pre-determined level of cover that is there until the expiration of the policy.  No scam, at all, no one is forced to accept the premiums and there is always a payout.   Those who want an increasing benefit can go for index-linked life insurance.

 

Commission paid to intermediaries has no effect on the agreed level of cover, or the premiums, so, again, no scam.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

1 hour ago, gearbox said:

If you make more than X amount of $ in Australia you are going to have Medicare surcharge if you don't take private health cover. For income of $180k plus the surcharge is bigger than the private cover premiums.

 

I think Lil Johnny introduced it.

Exactly. That too.

One trick had been for years, as part of that, they didn't increase the income cut off limits meaning as people's income went up bit by bit people went over the limit, or went to a higher tier, that were forced to get health insurance or cop the tax.  

The one sweetener was the rebate you got on the cost of the insurance. But they had a further nasty trick too, brought in by Abbott I think, where that rebate percentage is decreasing a bit each year as well. So initially you got 30 per cent off if your income was lower than the lowest tier but that has now decreased in 2023 to 24.6. Same for higher incomes. Thanks Tony. 

 

Edited December 31, 2023 by Fat is a type of crazy

[gearbox]

50 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

“I tried to get him travel insurance that would cover scooters, but there was nothing,” she said.

 

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/aussie-father-fighting-for-his-life-after-serious-scooter-accident-in-bali/news-story/86c3b39966c8845a9a547f8247a2a181

 

Our daughter Leah, Kevin's wife, who is 32 weeks pregnant, has made the rush decision with Kevin's father and brother, to fly over there to be by his side for few days.

 

....we are doing a Go Fund Me

There are definitely travel insurance policies in Australia covering motorbikes, from my memory it is only $20 extra to get cover with Medibank Private travel insurance.

 

Of course there are rules to get valid cover, like the requirement to wear a helmet. When driving in Samui, in a 20 minutes car drive I would see probably 100+ foreigners on motorbikes without helmets, many don't even have shirts.

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Exactly. That too.

One trick had been for years, as part of that, they didn't increase the income cut off limits meaning as people's income went up bit by bit people went over the limit, or went to a higher tier, that were forced to get health insurance or cop the tax.  

The one sweetener was the rebate you got on the cost of the insurance. But they had a further nasty trick too, brought in by Abbott I think, where that rebate percentage is decreasing a bit each year as well. So initially you got 30 per cent off if your income was lower than the lowest tier but that has now decreased in 2023 to 24.6. Same for higher incomes. Thanks Tony. 

 

The problem with government tax schemes, is that the people that actually earn enough to have to pay the taxes, are generally smarter than the people in the government that develop the schemes. 

[NoDisplayName]

6 minutes ago, gearbox said:

There are definitely travel insurance policies in Australia covering motorbikes, from my memory it is only $20 extra to get cover with Medibank Private travel insurance.

 

Of course there are rules to get valid cover, like the requirement to wear a helmet. When driving in Samui, in a 20 minutes car drive I would see probably 100+ foreigners on motorbikes without helmets, many don't even have shirts.

 

I'm just unclear on the point of this here thread.  Apparently insurance is bad, and the two examples we've been given are:

 

1)  lady gets drunk and injures herself, which is not covered by insurance, and 2)  guy doesn't even have insurance.

 

[Fat is a type of crazy]

16 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

The problem with government tax schemes, is that the people that actually earn enough to have to pay the taxes, are generally smarter than the people in the government that develop the schemes. 

They introduced a scheme that has some elements of fairness initially with a carrot and a stick. The stick got bigger as it was harder and harder to avoid the extra tax while the cost of the private insurance you are somewhat forced into, goes up and up, in the past well above inflation.  The carrot got smaller too as the benefit of the rebate is chipped away going down and down. Not fair but there it is. 

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

They introduced a scheme that has some elements of fairness initially with a carrot and a stick. The stick got bigger as it was harder and harder to avoid the extra tax while the cost of the private insurance you are somewhat forced into, goes up and up, in the past well above inflation.  The carrot got smaller too as the benefit of the rebate is chipped away going down and down. Not fair but there it is. 

They need the money, The taxpayers are all dying, and all the people they import are tax-recipients. But they are really great, hard-working people, wink-wink-nudge-nudge....

[GammaGlobulin]

Insurance, in many cases, is a scam.

 

Just pay more attention to insurance agents who drive around in expensive cars, and eat expensive meals, and exhibit many Narcissistic Personality Disorder Traits....