|
naitch
May 12, 2003, 5:32 PM
Post #1 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2002
Posts: 539
|
Has any one ever applied for life insurance and had the insurance agent/company ask you if you mountain/rock climb? Just recently happened to me and they wanted to put me into a high risk catagory...
|
|
|
|
|
sunsation
May 12, 2003, 5:41 PM
Post #2 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 16, 2002
Posts: 184
|
I am nuking what I just wrote so that it does not incriminate me to my insurance company. Whatever happened to the nuke button for posts?
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 12, 2003, 5:42 PM
Post #3 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Has any one ever applied for life insurance and had the insurance agent/company ask you if you mountain/rock climb? Just recently happened to me and they wanted to put me into a high risk catagory... Yes. I have children and feel it's completely inappropriate to not have it. Yes, I was asked specifically if I engaged in a series of X-treme sports, mountain climbing was one of them. Once I indicated an affirmative, they sent me a detailed questionaire. I've successfully purchased two policies and both times had to fill out a form of some sort and a resultant rider was attached to the policy. They asked very detailed questions, such as do you ice climb and how many days a year. What kind of protection system do you use? Do you sleep on climbs? How many nights? They wanted to know about high altitude climbing, soloing, etc, etc, etc. I indicated I did them all except for the big peaks (I promised my wife I wouldn't and well, I can't afford it anyway). The insurance agent told me the underwriters are especially concerned with folks such as yourself, relative beginners who have only been at it a year or three. To a point, more experience is better. Of course I played down things like solo mountaineering, though I did mention it (as I firmly believe the chop, if it ever comes, is far more likely on some 3rd or 4th class Sierra route than say a 5.10 trad lead). Kemper was one. Term insurance. The current one is, um, First Penn Pacific. Neither had a cost penalty for me, I got the preferred rate from both companies. Oh, 30 years this summer, climbing. DMT
|
|
|
|
|
scottharms
May 12, 2003, 5:52 PM
Post #4 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 11, 2002
Posts: 84
|
i'm a general insurance broker but am familiar with the life side of things and it it definitley one of the questions with most life insurance policies. No gettin around it either. I'm in the same boat, my wife wants life ins. on me and have to do it one of these days. Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
crag
May 12, 2003, 5:54 PM
Post #5 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 29, 2003
Posts: 623
|
Life Ins. for Climbers: My life insurance policy covers my climbing to the point that it is understood by the underwriter, (Kemper) that what I do is a recreational activity while on vacation. I even spoke with the underwriter himself and explained that I did not agree with his definition of what I did and that if I were killed out at my local crag while playing hooky on a Wed. afternoon or on the Coleman Headwall they would not pay thus destining my survivors to litigation. Application process involved complete medical check and supplemental and Multi-State application forms. He explained that unless I did this for a living that they would be able to cover me. Granted its Term Life insurance (500K) but I’m mostly confident that the policy would be honored.
|
|
|
|
|
murf
May 12, 2003, 6:00 PM
Post #6 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2002
Posts: 1150
|
If you have children climbing w/o life insurance is IMHO irresponsible. I have a policy, and my experience was much like Dingus'. I had to fill in a detailed questionare. The first pushback was unacceptable. I cannot remember who it was from, perhaps Allstate? My agent took a look around and came up with Empire General, a AAA underwriter that took both myself and my wife, who is much less experience with little or no cost hit due to climbing. I guess its worth mentioning that to the best of my knowledge, lying on a insurance application is cause for non-payment. This is valid for the first 2 years ( CA only? ) for the policy. After that period answers on application do not impact ( ouch ) payment. YMMV. This is based on somewhat dim recollections of discussions with my agent, since I fully disclosed my climbing, I wasn't that worried about this part. Similar discussion on rec.climbing awhile back. Murf
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
May 12, 2003, 6:43 PM
Post #7 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
In reply to: If you have children climbing w/o life insurance is IMHO irresponsible. Murf Bullsh*t. Life insurance is a personal decision. If your wife and kids aren't depending on your future income, why the need? Spare me the brainwashed, Americanized, fear of the future speach. Don't bother telling me how irresponsibe I am, I already know. 8) Studies have shown that people with life insurance are more likely to actually have the need for it than people without it. The whole Risk management thing seems ironic. Climbing is all about actively managing risk for oneself. Why would you transfer that risk to another? Why not just stop climbing if you are really worried about the impact on your wife and kids. The $$$ ain't going to replace you anyway. Maybe it would be more appropriate top say that climbing at all is irresponsible. It is. AND you may want to really check into whatever policies you are depending upon. Most DO NOT cover deaths due to extreme activities. Just because they ask one about behaviors, doesn't mean they actually cover it.
|
|
|
|
|
litedawg
May 12, 2003, 7:42 PM
Post #8 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2001
Posts: 337
|
I am an agent with one of the largest life insurance companies in the US, I am also a climber. I have written policies on climbers and they have not been down rated due to rock climbing specifically. FACT: a life insurance company will rate (charge more to ) an applicant based on the company's Mortality Tables. Years of experience and statistical analysis go into creating Mortality tables. We have been in business for 157 years and have the best mortality tables in the industry, WHAT does that mean? We have a far better idea, statistically speaking when a person is going to die due to health or risky activity (airplane piloting, rodeo riding, rock climbing.) We have much lower premiums for climbers because we have done our homework.
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
May 12, 2003, 8:06 PM
Post #9 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
Salesmen .....meh I'll start listening when an Actuary posts...... ...and even then I won't. Don't bother me with the facts once I've already made up my mind. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
sandbag
May 12, 2003, 8:17 PM
Post #10 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2003
Posts: 1443
|
Screw whole life just get term, its cheap, and always ALWAYS read the the fine print. and dont tell them im getting my private pilots license neither!!! :P
|
|
|
|
|
mhr2000
May 12, 2003, 8:26 PM
Post #11 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2002
Posts: 290
|
ahhh... the good old "Let's screw them good if they do anything other then sit on the couch" routine. It isn't any of their damn business to know what activities you participate in. Tell them you never participate in anything other then staying inside and watching television. Are you supposed to contact them every time you take up a new sport as well? Hello....bloodsuckers, inc., yeah I started skiing this winter and thought I'd let you know because I may not be paying enough as it is. I've never seen a contract say "this policy doesn't cover skydiving, climbing, skiing, etc." They only want to know up front so they can raise the rate before the contract gets signed. Forget them!
|
|
|
|
|
murf
May 12, 2003, 8:31 PM
Post #12 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2002
Posts: 1150
|
Hey Doc, I'm glad you're proud being irreponsible ( I can only assume that's what the smiley means ). I will agree that if your wife and/or children aren't dependent on your future income, no insurance is necessary. I will also agree, that life insurance, like Hawwiian shirts, is a personal decision. Its nice that your famliy can put your daughter through college/art school/whatever, if you aren't there. Not buying the implied causal relationship between having life insurance and death rates though. Murf Edited to say : Contrary to the above post, my application/policy did include language concerning undisclosed activities.
|
|
|
|
|
litedawg
May 12, 2003, 9:03 PM
Post #13 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2001
Posts: 337
|
Ahhhhh.... Ignorance is bliss, is it not. It is human nature to mock and be afraid of that which we do not understand. I am curious as to how many of the persons posting opinions on this thread have ever actually sat down and looked at a life insurance policy, or own one for that matter, so that they could actually speak intelligently about what it is they are dogging on? Most of what is being said is generalized, incorrect, or outright stupid and false.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
May 14, 2003, 3:51 PM
Post #14 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I am curious as to how many of the persons posting opinions on this thread have ever actually sat down and looked at a life insurance policy, or own one for that matter, so that they could actually speak intelligently about what it is they are dogging on? Most of what is being said is generalized, incorrect, or outright stupid and false. Well... I just looked through this thread. Here's my count: 10 unique posters... 5 of us have admitted to having insurance policies. I read mine end to end. 2 of you are brokers or agents. I assume both of you have them too. So that's 7 of 10, not bad, eh? 1 admitted to not having insurance, said he didn't need it. 2 are unknown. Most of what is being said is stupid? If you feel compelled to speak up, whyn't set the record straight? DMT
|
|
|
|
|
toobigtoclimb
May 14, 2003, 5:22 PM
Post #15 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 426
|
So here's the question Trevor: If you have life insurance (which I do - by choice, not from societal norms or peer pressure <---flame avoidance disclaimer) and you filled out the climbing questionnaire (which I did) and they didn't raise the rate, where can I find the fact that I climb in my policy? Or is it just the fact that they attached the questionnaire to the back? I guess I should call my agent.........
|
|
|
|
|
jaylaka
May 14, 2003, 5:31 PM
Post #16 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 382
|
as a parent, and a single parent at that, i carry life insurance. i have two separate policies, both term, and neither asked me about rock climbing. while it's a matter of choice, i've always planned for the worst and hoped for the best, you know? if something should happen to me, i'd want whoever was raising my son to not have to assume any additional financial burden, when he's a minor or for college. i mean, i carry full insurance on my car for the same reason. statistically, i probably won't get into an accident. but if something should happen, i want my ass covered. :D jen
|
|
|
|
|
zetedog
May 15, 2003, 1:35 PM
Post #17 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2002
Posts: 69
|
In reply to: Life insurance is a personal decision. If your wife and kids aren't depending on your future income, why the need? Agreed. This is a pretty good point. Generally speaking, no one gets *rich* off of a loved ones death. If you are planning on it, you are probably carrying too much.
In reply to: Studies have shown that people with life insurance are more likely to actually have the need for it than people without it. This statement is akin to those that don't where a helmet because they feel the only time they get hit in the head with rocks is when they are donning one. There is no correlation that can be discerned between those that die, have life insurance, and their dependents invoking the policy based on need, as most invoke the policy anyway. The null hypothesis to test this statement would be something like those people that die, not having a policy, have dependents that wouldn't need the money that a policy would have provided (covered by the first quoted statement). Either that, or that those that don't pay for a policy are less likely to die while having dependents that need the money that a policy would provide. As a former insurance rep, statistically speaking, more people with dependents die without life insurance than those that have it. This is of course skewed down by individuals with lower incomes that can't afford life insurance are also more likely *statistically speaking* to pass away. All of this really goes to show that people that have degrees in math shouldn't become life insurance salesmen, as evidenced by myself. Most fo the calls I rec'd were broken down into statistics and acturarial lessons then my supervisors cared for. Then again, next time someone quotes a study or a statistic, remember that studies have also shown that 100 percent of people that eat pickles die. Anywho, Several people have questioned what is and isn't covered. Most polices are actually a contract that you, and a counterpart with the underwriters sign. Not everything is specifically defined in the contract, rather references other documents that may not have been delivered, but are available otherwise. My current policy defines the difference between a hobby and a singular event tried for fun (something like if you do the activity more than three times in a 12 month period, it is now a hobby). Having taken a couple of those crappy actuarial classes for my math degree in college, I asked the underwriter, and they said that most people that try a new activity tend to be guided, such as someone trying whitewater rafting are more likely to go with an outfitter. Theory being that even if poop happens, a *trained* person would be there to bail you out. The contract also states that any new *hobbies* that I take up are to be reported, or else won't be covered. The converse to this clause is also in the contract: I have not done a *hobby* in 24 months, I can have it removed. Premium may be added or subtracted as they see fit. Somehow I doubt they would reduce my premium if I removed Rock Climbing. The add on for having it covered was only 1.50 a month based on my experience, times guided, where I go, and the since I don't do mountaineering. Every policy is different, read the contract.
|
|
|
|
|
jgill
May 17, 2003, 5:01 AM
Post #18 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2002
Posts: 653
|
OK, just a little factual humor in an otherwise serious topic: Back in 1954, when I was 17, a friend and I drove to CO from GA to climb. My dad didn't know what to make of this, and years later told me he had taken out a burial policy on me! More recently, when my wife and I applied for long term extended care insurance, I informed the company I was a life-long rock climber. I am a year older than my wife and we are both in good health, but my policy was considerably cheaper than hers! Wonder what they're trying to tell me? 8)
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
May 17, 2003, 5:23 AM
Post #19 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
zetedog, I appreciate your analysis. May I just expound that I did not say there was a causal relationship between insurance and needing it, but I will now go on record and state that I do believe there is one. I have no empirical evidence to back my assertion. Only keen observation of human beings. I have found large discrepancies between what Insurance agents/reps--whatever the title-- have said and what Actuaries state. Why is this the case? I always find it hard to swallow pablam from a person that has a financial interest based on the advice they give me. No offense intended, just as a professional that deals daily with issues of conflict of interest, I may be a bit skewed..... In the end, my loathing of all things insurance stems from the principle that I am really betting against myself when I buy insurance. The company is betting that I won't have an accident and I am betting that I will. Yet, the whole time I am trying to not have one. Isn't that really the layman's way of looking at it? I mean, Allstate, or whoever, is laying odds that for $50 a month their money says I ain't dying. The only payoff is if I do! What a f*ckin bargain for me!
|
|
|
|
|
curt
May 17, 2003, 5:36 AM
Post #20 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
First of all, you need to recognize insurance for what it really is--the largest legalized scam in the world. The whole theory of insurance (to spread the risk of an individual across a large population) has become bastardized in recent times. These days insurance companies are public corporations. Consider the simple implications of this fact. Public companies must, by definition have the interests of their shareholders (owners) in mind when making any company decisions. To not do so is a breach of fiduciary responsibility. In order to do this, the interests of insurance policy holders must, by definition, be given lower priority. The entire goal of an insurance company is to gather the maximum revenues possible from policy holders and disburse the minimum payments to these same people. This hardly represents the simple concept of shared risk across a population. Is it any wonder that any company large enough to "self insure" will do so? Curt
|
|
|
|
|
chalker7
May 17, 2003, 5:36 AM
Post #21 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 317
|
[quote="litedawg"]It is human nature to mock and be afraid of that which we do not understand. well said can i use that quote in my signature?
|
|
|
|
|
curt
May 17, 2003, 6:48 AM
Post #22 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: OK, just a little factual humor in an otherwise serious topic: Back in 1954, when I was 17, a friend and I drove to CO from GA to climb. My dad didn't know what to make of this, and years later told me he had taken out a burial policy on me! More recently, when my wife and I applied for long term extended care insurance, I informed the company I was a life-long rock climber. I am a year older than my wife and we are both in good health, but my policy was considerably cheaper than hers! Wonder what they're trying to tell me? 8) John, Most fortunately your dad was not able to collect on this policy! Curt
|
|
|
|
|
notintoclimbing
Jun 4, 2003, 12:52 AM
Post #23 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2003
Posts: 7
|
The policy for the Mrs. may be more expensive if Gill's is "cheaper," because women are expected to outlive their men by 20 or 30 years. Maybe the company thinks Gill's can be cheaper because they won't have to cover more than a few years. If this is the case, they must not know his physical condition. For cases of die hard smokers, and those whose view of being active means yelling at the t.v. during football season, the insurance companies may be right about men falling apart. My mom is going into her 21st year without my dad. Long term extended care is not covered by Medicare. Therefore the growth of companies selling you the fear of bankrupting your family in exchange for a long life in the care of others is evidently the new thing.
|
|
|
|
|
reasontobehave
Jun 14, 2003, 4:40 PM
Post #24 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 14, 2003
Posts: 11
|
I finally figured it out. His Long term care policy is cheaper not because they think he won't live very long, but because they know he would walk out of the place after 48 hours of awful food, playing checkers, "chair exercises," and putting puzzles together in the "activity room." LTC is not congruent with TLC. They just make you think they are so you will buy into it. Besides, there is a lot of hanky panky that goes on in these LTC facilities and the Mrs. just to protect him from the women would get him out of there in a flash, and vice versa. Sayonara to those kinds of benefits! On edit, I would like to explain "chair exercises" for those new to the idea. It's not musical chairs, although they do play music. Musical chairs would lead to arguments over whose chair is it, and they don't want that. No, you sit in a chair and lift your arms up and down and that is your exercise for the day. To make it more fun, they pass a beach ball around the circle, but that gets kind of iffy when they get too energetic with it and bust a few crystals off the chandelier above. Well, that's chair exercises, and we hope Dr. Gill is never doomed to live in a Long Term Care facility where the stairs are off limits to anyone over 12 because it may get the blood circulating and that would defeat the whole purpose of the place. You are to do as little as possible so that you can die soon and your bed get resold to the next "patient." I have made my offer. Be good.
|
|
|
|
|
reasontobehave
Jun 16, 2003, 3:26 PM
Post #25 of 29
(3948 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 14, 2003
Posts: 11
|
the best insurance would be not to climb. but getting killed in a car wreck isn't near as much fun as getting killed climbing, I s'pose. What do I know, NOTHING.
|
|
|
|
|
|