tmmonline.nz  |   landlords.co.nz        About Good Returns  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  RSS Feeds

NZ's Financial Adviser News Centre

GR Logo
Last Article Uploaded: Saturday, December 7th, 8:03AM

Insurance

rss
Latest Headlines

Goal-based insurance planning

It still strikes me as amazing that lots and lots of home loan insurance is sold and not very much “you get to keep your home” insurance is sold.

Wednesday, August 9th 2017, 9:52AM

by Russell Hutchinson

The old complaint that if you insure your home loan payment, then the party you have protected is the bank, not really you or your family, has some validity to it. That’s because the goal should be: “if I can’t work, we get to keep our home”, not the implicit “the payment on the home loan is made.”

Using a goal to describe what we want to happen – rather than complicated maths – helps to connect with clients. We still need the maths, but clients want you to do that for them. The idea runs something like this:

If you can’t work – what do you want to happen? Pause. Nervous shuffling. Eventually we agree that we would like some income to be paid. We know ACC won’t cover everything, so we look at income protection. We discover that the limit is roughly 75% (with variations, I know). We can add some trauma, we can add some TPD (sometimes it is built in, we can top it up) we want some life cover. The amounts are a question. How much depends on the goal.

A goal based approach to the amounts can be described like this:

Even if I can’t work / a terrible disease happens / or I die… “all my goals for my family can be achieved” – the kids get to go to uni, the super is completed, and so on. That’s expensive – sometimes very expensive depending on underwriting and the amounts involved. But you work out the numbers and show it. But a fall-back goal can be identified:

Even if I can’t work / a terrible disease happens / or I die… “we can at least keep our home”. In this case, we know we may struggle a bit. One will have to work. We hope that the disability isn’t permanent and I can return to work. Things may be tight, but at least we get to keep our home if we want to. But even this appears to be beyond a substantial majority of the buying public, given the very low rates of income protection purchase.

Even if I can’t work / a terrible disease happens / or I die… “we can survive a while and work things out” This is not so good. But what if the client cannot even afford the insurance required to keep the home. It does happen. Then we can aim for covering a period. Some time, in which I could recover, and get back on my feet. At the end of it, I might have to sell up, but at least it would be managed. The family would have a chance.

After the goal is set, a capital needs analysis is required. But the client just want to know that you used the right data and you are competent to work it out. They are employing an adviser after all.

On the other hand, you can come up with a number out of thin air and kinda suggest that it will meet one of these goals. But that’s risky.

Tags: ACC Insurance Advisers Life insurance Russell Hutchinson TPD

« More than insurance adviceNagging and the definition of ‘financial advice’ »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

No comments yet

Sign In to add your comment

 

print

Printable version  

print

Email to a friend
Insurance Briefs

Apex Advice buys life business
Auckland-based Apex Advice has acquired a well-established insurance advice business.

Chubb's latest champion
Young maths prodigy takes out actuarial award.

New book: Unlocking group insurance
Christchurch adviser Corey Williams has released a new book helping advisers and employers put group insurance schemes in place.

Insurer gets warning from RBNZ
Geneva Finance's insurance subsidiary Quest Insurance been given a warning from the prudential regulator.

News Bites
Latest Comments
  • Advisors must take note of supervisor guidelines on AML/CFT
    “When I read this, the following memory plucked a note. Venue was a US financial planning conference maybe 30 years ago. Speaker...”
    1 day ago by Murray Weatherston
  • Partners kills its matrix
    “@Backstage, thanks. I agree there is no relationship to CoFI, though, from a service perspective, I have two other providers...”
    4 days ago by JPHale
  • Partners kills its matrix
    “Partners Life has decided to stop using its COM for advisers as it believes the system may breach the CoFI regulations which...”
    4 days ago by Amused
  • Partners kills its matrix
    “Insurance companies should stick to their lane. They are not advisers and even those that employ advisers should not be crossing...”
    4 days ago by Tash
  • [GRTV] The nitty gritty of Smart’s ETFs
    “Advisors should consider all gateways into investment markets including cheaply priced ETFs to provide access to low priced...”
    5 days ago by Pragmatic
Subscribe Now

Mortgage Rates Newsletter

Daily Weekly

Previous News
Most Commented On
About Us  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy  |  RSS Feeds  |  Letters  |  Archive  |  Toolbox  |  Disclaimer
 
Site by Web Developer and eyelovedesign.com