I don't know of
any particular problems with the company having particularly stringent
underwriting, which is why I asked who it was.
I was 15 years
working for a life insurance company before I joined the legal profession, so I
have just a little experience of this.
In your initial
post you said that there was no particular health issue.
filter the medical declaration in (certificate of continuing good health),
which said that your health was no different now than when you took the policy
If that is the
case and you now have any hypertension, they would certainly have asked for
either a medical or your GP to fill in a questionnaire. Based upon what is in
the questionnaire they take a decision to either take the policy on or not.
Whilst this may not have been a problem in 1994 when you were 35, it becomes a
much bigger problem when you are 54. Indeed, I do not know whether they would
have taken you want with exactly the same problem at 35 because I do not know
whether you had the problem then or not.
They are not
actually under any obligation to take you on even if you were squeakyclean.
The policy appears
to have lapsed through non-payment of
premiums and as such, it is only reinstated on the same terms as the original
policy and if things have changed even slightly (and in fact, even if things I
have not changed at all) they are under no duty to reinstate the policy.
On these facts, it
appears to be simply an underwriting decision on the basis that 19 years later,
you have a problem which you did not have when you applied for the policy 19
It is also
significant that they have reinstated the life-insurance policies, but not the
ones for critical illness. The reason is that the underwriting criteria.
Because of the risk involved with critical illness cover, is extremely strict
and basically if you've got anything more than a cough or cold, you are lucky
to get cover at all, even from outset.
With regard to
your numbered questions, I am afraid that you would need to speak to a medical
expert Dr with regard to 1.
2 . You have had
the benefit of cover for 19 years and therefore those premiums have paid for
that cover for that time and you were not entitled to the premiums back. I don't
know whether the policy has a surrender value or not, but if it does have any
surrender/investment element that would be maintained. It would be unusual for
a critical illness policy to have an investment element, but I do not know
every product from every provider and my market intelligence is rusty, to say
3 . There is no
harm whatsoever in getting your consultant to write. If you have not done
already, it would be worthwhile speaking to whoever filled the medical
certificate in to find out whether, in their opinion, this would lead to being
declined for critical illness cover.
I appreciate that
not of this is probably the answer you wanted, but based upon the fact you have
given me that is how I see this and there is no point in me misleading you
Can I help further?
bear with me today because I will be online and off-line all day.
The next part is
really important for me:
forget to positively rate my
answer service (even if it was not what you wanted to hear) and I will follow
up any further points you raise for free. If you don't rate it positively, then
the site keep your deposit and I get 0 for my time. If in ratings you feel that
you expected more or it only helped a little, please ask me for further info
before rating me negatively otherwise I don't get paid at all for my time and
The thread remains open. Thanks