Just got LTC quotes....

Personally, I would take my chances with the lifetime pay premium and survivorship benefit. It is entirely possible that this couple could live to age 65 and then one spouse drops dead of a heart attack. At that point, the remaining spouse would have a policy paid up for life since there were no claims and they'd still likely come out ahead of the 10-pay as long as their rates didn't double or triple. The survivorship benefit can also be reduced to a 7-year timeframe instead of the standard 10 years for about an extra 3% in premium cost.


Please clarify for me the last sentence....I understand that if one spouse dies, the other no longer has to pay premiums. Is that if it occurs within 10 years or after 10 years?
 
Personally, I would take my chances with the lifetime pay premium and survivorship benefit. It is entirely possible that this couple could live to age 65 and then one spouse drops dead of a heart attack. At that point, the remaining spouse would have a policy paid up for life since there were no claims and they'd still likely come out ahead of the 10-pay as long as their rates didn't double or triple. The survivorship benefit can also be reduced to a 7-year timeframe instead of the standard 10 years for about an extra 3% in premium cost.


Please clarify for me the last sentence....I understand that if one spouse dies, the other no longer has to pay premiums. Is that if it occurs within 10 years or after 10 years?

After 10 years. 7 years if buying the "enhanced" survivorship option. If claims occurred within 10 years for a couple that is now age 52, well, you came out way ahead on what you paid in premiums anyway...
 
Well the wife probably wouldn't need LTC for at least 30 years.

Just for fun, if we invest $2600/year at 5% real growth we get ~$172k in todays dollars to use for long term care at age 82. That would certainly go quite a long way.

And if she doesn't need it the kids can inherit it.
 
Well the wife probably wouldn't need LTC for at least 30 years.

Just for fun, if we invest $2600/year at 5% real growth we get ~$172k in todays dollars to use for long term care at age 82. That would certainly go quite a long way.

And if she doesn't need it the kids can inherit it.

That $172k would be the amount available in 30 years, not the present value. $172k in 30 years will likely buy less than one year in a nursing home. The present value of that is about $40k, which again is less than one year in a nursing home.
 
That $172k would be the amount available in 30 years, not the present value. $172k in 30 years will likely buy less than one year in a nursing home. The present value of that is about $40k, which again is less than one year in a nursing home.

No, The growth in the payment is 5% real (inflation taken out). I should have also indicated that the $2600 payment goes up with inflation.

In that case the $172k is in today's dollars.

Anyway, the concept of self-insuring is one that may also be considered.
 
No, The growth in the payment is 5% real (inflation taken out). I should have also indicated that the $2600 payment goes up with inflation.

In that case the $172k is in today's dollars.

Anyway, the concept of self-insuring is one that may also be considered.

Sorry, thought you were using 5% as the interest rate. That's a big assumption for a couple going into their 60's and 70's that would likely have a lower risk tolerance. You can't self-insure against the risk of an early claim though, which is the reason why insurance exists in the first place....your numbers go out the window if a claim is made in year 7 instead of year 30.
 
aren't you also benefiting from group rates at megacorp?
Yes, Megacorp furnishes the group statistics but puts no money into our LTC policies. Also, we don't have to buy the inflation adjusted premium in August. We can continue to pay the same rate and have the same coverage.
 
Yes, Megacorp furnishes the group statistics but puts no money into our LTC policies. Also, we don't have to buy the inflation adjusted premium in August. We can continue to pay the same rate and have the same coverage.

Well, not really "the same coverage," right? Since the real buying power of your benefit has decreased by whatever inflation has taken place in the nursing home/home care business.

These policies that allow a person to buy more coverage to keep up with inflation are tricky things, I know I sure was surprised to learn how they work. The costs for these "inflation increases" become huge as one gets older because what you are really doing is buying new coverage on an old (maybe very old) person. Many people will find it extremely expensive to keep buying the additional coverage. I'd strongly urge anyone who is planning to keep this coverage into old age to get a real projection of future costs. I think many people will decide to buy the inflation protection now and pay the higher premiums.
 
We can get group rates through DH's work with John Hancock. We are applying soon. However I doubt they will accept me due to kidney disease. It's not real bad, but I do have to see a specialist several times a year. My friend was denied because she sought out patient counseling for alcohol problems.
 
After 10 years. 7 years if buying the "enhanced" survivorship option. If claims occurred within 10 years for a couple that is now age 52, well, you came out way ahead on what you paid in premiums anyway...

Just to clarify this point, with Genworth if you opt for the "enhanced" survivorship option, the policy would be paid up after 7 years of continuous payments regardless of any claims incurred if one spouse dies. The 10 year standard option requires that no claims be made to receive the benefit after the death of one spouse.
 
I am hearing so many stories about people who buy LTC insurance, then end up dropping it when rates are raised dramatically. Even a 10 year payin seems to allow 9 chances for rates to become unreasonable. Does anyone offer LTC priced like longevity insurance? That is I can pay a single premium now (at a younger age maybe) and be guaranteed (as well as any insurance contract is) to have inflation protected LTC coverage in the future. That sounds like a risk for the company but exactly what I would want, a way to pay someone else to assume this risk.
 
I am hearing so many stories about people who buy LTC insurance, then end up dropping it when rates are raised dramatically. Even a 10 year payin seems to allow 9 chances for rates to become unreasonable. Does anyone offer LTC priced like longevity insurance? That is I can pay a single premium now (at a younger age maybe) and be guaranteed (as well as any insurance contract is) to have inflation protected LTC coverage in the future. That sounds like a risk for the company but exactly what I would want, a way to pay someone else to assume this risk.

Yes, some companies still offer a single pay. See the discussion earlier in this post on that. In short, it is available, but expensive.
 
Do you know if they care if you have a parent who had Alzheimers? Well, I mean do they deny you?
 
Last edited:
Do you know if they care if you have a parent who had Alzheimers? Well, I mean do they deny you?

A parent with Alzheimer's won't change the underwriting for the applicant, so no, they won't deny you for that.
 
Folks, insurance is about risk. You have homeowner's insurance. Auto insurance. Umbrella insurance. Health insurance. Long term care is insurance. You hope like heck you won't need any of your insurance policies; but, you're darn happy you have insurance when you do need it.

Would you think about dropping your homeowner's insurance just because you didn't have a mortgage and you thought the premium was too high? Would you drop your auto insurance because your rates went up? Would you not have health insurance because you feel good today? What if you had a loss? Could you pay for it out of your pocket?

LTC just isn't that complicated. I bet most of you haven't spent this much time on your homeowner's or auto insurance policies. For us, LTC is a necessary part of our financial plan. For some of you, it's all about the premium. No one is going to convince the nay-sayers of the need for LTC. They're dug in deep.

I appreciate dgoldenz's thoroughness and thoughtfulness in answering LTC questions.
 
Would you drop your auto insurance because your rates went up?

Of course. I would and I did.

It's not all about "you need insurance" so you have to buy it at any cost. It's about assessing risk and the cost to transfer that risk to the insurance company. If the insurance is unreasonably priced, then I may decide to retain that risk.
 
LTC just isn't that complicated.
Then why is it that some of the biggest insurance companies in America can't figure out how much to charge for it? They either get out of the business or surprise their policyholders with escalating rates.

It's dang expensive. And it's very hard to buy the type of true insurance many of us would like (tell me where I can get a policy with an 18 month exclusion period, 6 year shared benefit).

I appreciate dgoldenz's thoroughness and thoughtfulness in answering LTC questions.
As do I.
 
Folks, insurance is about risk. You have homeowner's insurance. Auto insurance. Umbrella insurance. Health insurance. Long term care is insurance. You hope like heck you won't need any of your insurance policies; but, you're darn happy you have insurance when you do need it.

Would you think about dropping your homeowner's insurance just because you didn't have a mortgage and you thought the premium was too high? Would you drop your auto insurance because your rates went up? Would you not have health insurance because you feel good today? What if you had a loss? Could you pay for it out of your pocket?

LTC just isn't that complicated. I bet most of you haven't spent this much time on your homeowner's or auto insurance policies. For us, LTC is a necessary part of our financial plan. For some of you, it's all about the premium. No one is going to convince the nay-sayers of the need for LTC. They're dug in deep.

I appreciate dgoldenz's thoroughness and thoughtfulness in answering LTC questions.

Not so fast, hoss. LTC is a very different animal than auto and home insurance. With auto and home you pay a set price for protection of an asset and liability coverage. Simple product, straight forward pricing, and the industry has many decades of data on such losses that cover the full cycle of these policies. Life insurance looks like that too. The consumer achieves full (subject to policy limits) and clear risk transference for a firm price and the coverage/claims is proximate to the initiation of the policy/payment of premiums.

In contrast, the industry has a hazy notion at best of how to price LTC, very little data, premiums are paid for decades prior to most policy benefit payouts, and the price is not set up front. This is not simple risk transference and it is not transparent, except in the (very expensive) case of the single pay policies. This is not a simple product and it is not a clear winner for the consumer.

I also appreciate dgoldenz's input (and his thick skin).
 
Of course. I would and I did.

It's not all about "you need insurance" so you have to buy it at any cost. It's about assessing risk and the cost to transfer that risk to the insurance company. If the insurance is unreasonably priced, then I may decide to retain that risk.

You would be willing to self insure. Then if you or your family members were in an accident for which you/they were legally responsible, you would be able to pay all medical and physical damage costs to the other party? Let's put it this way. If an uninsured motorist caused harm to your family, would you just shrug your shoulders and tell him you understand they can't pay your families' medical bills because they didn't have insurance because it was just too was just too high? Or if they didn't carry enough insurance and you had to dig in your pocket to pay the rest of the expenses?

Personally, I think all of the auto insurance should be no-fault. Each person carries as much insurance as they feel they would need. If you chose not to insure yourself, then you absorb all of the costs of an accident regardless of fault.

Not so fast, hoss. LTC is a very different animal than auto and home insurance. With auto and home you pay a set price for protection of an asset and liability coverage. Simple product, straight forward pricing, and the industry has many decades of data on such losses that cover the full cycle of these policies. Life insurance looks like that too. The consumer achieves full (subject to policy limits) and clear risk transference for a firm price and the coverage/claims is proximate to the initiation of the policy/payment of premiums.

In contrast, the industry has a hazy notion at best of how to price LTC, very little data, premiums are paid for decades prior to most policy benefit payouts, and the price is not set up front. This is not simple risk transference and it is not transparent, except in the (very expensive) case of the single pay policies. This is not a simple product and it is not a clear winner for the consumer.

I also appreciate dgoldenz's input (and his thick skin).

I don't know where you live; but, my auto and homeowner's rates go up just about every year. That's excluding the inflation factor built into my homeowner's policy to increase coverage. My LTC premium has been flat for the last seven years.

In contrast, the industry has a hazy notion at best of how to price LTC, very little data, premiums are paid for decades prior to most policy benefit payouts, and the price is not set up front.

Ask anyone who's lived anywhere near the Gulf Coast about their windstorm premiums for their homes over the past several years. They've bounced all over the place to the point where some companies have discontinued the coverage. That's just as hazy as the infant LTC industry (compared to the other types of insurance) has had in trying to find their equilibrium.
 
Sure, you have annual rate resets for auto and home. But you can go shop the policy frequently and the interval of coverage is short. With LTC you can dump in premiums for a decade, get hit with massive rate increases and be stuck.
 
You would be willing to self insure. Then if you or your family members were in an accident for which you/they were legally responsible, you would be able to pay all medical and physical damage costs to the other party?

That's liability insurance, which is NOT the same as auto insurance. Your analogy that LTC is like any other kind of insurance does not hold up in this example. Besides, the value received compared to the rate paid IS an important consideration, even for liability insurance. I do not buy the maximum coverage offered by the insurance company for the maximum price requested. I make choices based on how I value the risk and what price I am willing to pay to shift that risk. Likewise, I do not necessarily buy earthquake or flood riders unless I live in an area where I am concerned about those possibilities.
 
That's liability insurance, which is NOT the same as auto insurance.

Auto insurance consists of liability and usually physical damage coverages. It sounds like you might have the minimum liability limits for the state in which you live since you say you're willing to take a risk with your coverages.

Auto insurance, just like LTC, give you options on coverages. The liability coverages (excluding Uninsured Motorist coverages) under auto are third party coverages - they protect people and property you injure or damage. Medical payments and Personal Injury Protection provide coverage for the people in your car. You can chose the limits of coverage you want under MedPay and PIP just like you can chose the limits of coverage you want under LTC. MedPay, PIP, and LTC are optional.

In the case of MedPay and PIP, fault does not have to be determined.

This shifts over to risk. You don't have to carry any insurance at all unless you have property that has a lien or you work for a company that requires you drive your own car for work. You don't have to carry health insurance, life insurance, or LTC. By not doing so, you assume the risk of the costs for care. That's OK up to a point.

Let's say you chose not to carry any insurance at all and there is a situation that requires costly medical intervention as well as extended care. It makes no difference if it's an auto accident, a fall off your roof, a stroke - something significant that impacts your ability to provide income needed to support your family. So you drain your savings. There's no income. There's no insurance to cover the medical bills.

If you are personally assuming the risk, then that's OK. Unfortunately, the extended cost of your care could shift over to taxpayers at one point and for those of us doing what we feel is the right thing by carrying the appropriate insurance are now asked to take care of you because you wanted to assume the risk.

The flip side of this, with you wanting to assume risk, is if you are penniless and require extended care - you have high odds of getting the caretaker who may not have the appropriate skill level for your needs.

You need to balance the money you feel you're saving by reducing or eliminating coverages and insurance with the risk. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people understate their long-term risk and the cost to mitigate the loss.

In my case, the annual premium I pay for LTC is 2% of the annual cost of a nursing home. Plus I have coverage for in-home care as well as physical alterations to my home to allow me to continue to stay there with a caretaker of my choice. There are some licensing things that have to be met; however, I have the final decision on my care.

Let's just call it a draw. There are several of you who are adamant you will never purchase long term care. There are several of us who have it as an integral part of our financial plan.

I also suspect those of us who have LTC also carry high liability limits on our auto and homeowner policies and probably also own an umbrella policy. Not that we have great risk that something will happen; we want to be prepared if and, more likely, when it happens.

We're fortunate we live in a place where we have choices. And that's fine as long as the final result for your decision to reduce or eliminate insurance does not impact the rest of us.
 
Worry About the Companies' Longevity....

I am trying to decide on which insurance company to purchase my LTC from.......I already have life insurance policies from Genworth (originally from First Colony). Should I go with Genworth again, or another company such as John Hancock or Mutual of Omaha?

In other words....what do you guys think of Genworth? It used to be owned by GE. I think that is no longer the case. Genworth is not as highly rated as the other companies I mentioned (those multiple ratings such as AM Best, Moody's, etc). Should I worry about Genworth being around in 20-30 years when I may need to make a LTC claim?



Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom