Paid to exercise

I can never see this happening; too complicated, and divisive. Plus see below…

My brother joked about doing this for his LV policy.

1 Like

The only incentive is to allow natural selection; and that’s not going to happen either. We live in a pretty social democracy; not the 1800s.

Private health in Oz is kind of compulsory. In that if you don’t have it the Gov ‘levy’. (not fine you, oh no, because that would make it compulsory!) you 1% of your annual gross salary if you don’t have. In NSW it’s also compulsory to have ambulance cover. (this is sometimes covered in a private health policy, sometimes not).

Every still pays 1.75% into Medicare but that’s becoming really only an option for the ‘last resort’. Nobody with a job relies on Medicare.

Some companies include health in their package, some don’t, some subsidise a % of it. The killer in Oz is ‘the gap’. This is the outrageous amount you pay after an operation when you realise that a load of the things you are ‘covered for’ are not covered. (even with 100% coverage!).

Some companies tried to create a product for ‘gap insurance’ but the Gov slapped that down.

Hence my comment about the good/bad of the proposal being a completely separate argument.

Pretty much everyone with a partner and/or children and/or a mortgage I’d hope!!!


1 Like

I’m just desperately waiting until I can get one of those “over 50’s plan with no medical questions to pay for the funeral”


Of course they don’t! This Forum is a far cry from the lives of millions of everyday people, just trying to get by. Life insurance is low on the list; actually it’s not there at all.

Us lot here are probably all pretty fortunate.

I find that hard to believe!!!

(EDIT: PHEW!!! The majority are insured

Compare the Market’s figures found there were 8.1 million households with life insurance – which meant, with 11.1 million mortgaged properties in the UK, 2.97 million households were unprotected.


So, you (both) go to work to pay the mortgage. one of you will get cancer (statistically speaking, if born after 1960)
You can’t work, due to the chemo.
You don’t have insurance.
You lose your home :scream:

Or, one of you dies, leaving the mortgage to just one person.
No insurance, no chance of one person paying it.
You lose your home🤯

We’re a household with life insurance, but no mortgage, and all those over 50’s folk too… so there will be lots more folk with mortgages without cover.

But you’re also missing death in service benefits for lots of people that they may be using instead for the cover, or simply taking the risk, statistically speaking you won’t die during your mortgage, so it’s not a big risk (which is why it’s a relatively cheap thing to have of course - mind you I could take the money I spend and buy netflix instead…)

I’ve always been up to triple salary covered through work but when I was out of work in 2014, we took separate life ins with LV. It was a bit of a nightmare with my medical records (strangely they were more interested in my migraines than my back ops).

We still have it going, so I’m life insured twice over but I upped the payout. Ours pays a lump sum. (£180k) upon death or a terminally ill diagnosis. We were never interested in one that pays out the mortgage because our mortgage is low and cash for Mrs FP is better. We are jointly covered. It’s approx £30 p/m.

Work LI is triple cover now as well.

We don’t currently have private health and haven’t for about 3yrs.

Yeah, but what about all the households that don’t have mortgages. Are there any figures on that? it must be a lot. My point really, is that the demographic here is not particularly representative; especially exercise wise :sweat_smile:

1 Like

This always reminds me of a conversation I had with a younger girl at work.
She thought you had to be killed at work to get death in service benefit, it was a bank so shot in a raid or something like that. She was over the moon when I explained it to her.


I think i have something with work. TBH i can’t really remember. But kind of along Jim’s thinking, it’s statistically unlikely that something will happen. A bird in hand and all that. Maybe thats flawed, maybe it’s not. But insuracne isn’t big business for no reason, and that reason definitely not philanthropy! I pay a ton on pet insurance, which i’m not sure is the right thing to do. Chucking money in an account would probably be more wise. Though the chances of the cats doing something stupid is probably reasonably high!!

I did think about some sort of cover when mini GB #2 came along, but never followed up on it. I hate dealing with annoying sales people, so i just didn’t bother.

i paid for my first dog and didn’t get cover for a condition that i didn’t know was pre existing…

I didn’t get cover for my second and was landed with a multiple 000 bill when it had to go to a special clinic for two weeks of intensive care. Just doing a rough calculation, the insurance would probably have cost about the same across its life…

i accepted the fact that if i could not pay for the home at any stage then i /we would down size…


ha - you should be so lucky - 34 for me and nothing less. (I’m an ex rugby prop forward)

1 Like

me and Mrs FB have never had life insurance cover. we just didn’t see the point of paying out good money so one of us collected a shitload of insurance if the other died. we lived together, worked together, played together, had no kids and the chances were/are that if one of us went in an accident then 2 of us would go as we spend so much time together. we have savings and assets which cover our lifestyle so don’t need a whole lot more from an insurance policy


For me, the main benefit of pet insurance is for smoothing out the cost of vet bills over the life of the pet. The insurers are in the business to make money, so in the long run you’re probably not going to get more back from them than you put in. You might have a pet that lives a long and happy life with no major medical conditions and it’ll cost you more by having insurance. Equally, you might have a pet that has serious medical conditions at a young age and you’ll see the benefit of the insurance straight away.

One of our dogs had a suspected back problem and the vet suggested that an MRI scan would clarify what was going on. The cost of the scan was estimated at £2-3k, depending on whether it involved an overnight stay, and if it could have potentially indicated that a £5k op was necessary. As it was covered by the insurance, we went for the scan and it showed that there was nothing wrong. If we hadn’t been insured we would probably have waited to see if the dog got better by herself and not gone for the scan.

for sure, and you are paying for the comfort in knowing that should there be a problem, you can take appropriate action…