Single Life, Joint Life and Menu Plans – What are the best options from a consumer perspective? – Forum recap part 2
In the second half of our November forum, experts gathered to explore the critical topic of protection options—joint life, single life, and menu plans—and how these choices impact consumers. With evolving family dynamics and increased financial complexity, traditional approaches like joint life policies are being reconsidered. The session brought together advisers, providers, and thought leaders to discuss how advisers can better serve their clients with flexible and tailored solutions.
The conversation highlighted the limitations of joint life policies, particularly around claims, separation issues, and the risk of leaving one partner uninsured after a payout. Single life policies and menu plans emerged as preferred solutions, offering greater flexibility, better coverage, and fewer complications in challenging situations like divorce or bereavement. Providers emphasised the importance of equipping advisers with the tools to explain these benefits clearly while maintaining compliance and affordability.
This page delves into the key takeaways from the session, exploring expert insights and practical guidance for making informed recommendations…
“From a provider’s perspective, the fact that Guardian doesn’t have a joint life offering has led us to position two singles in a way that networks can understand. But file checkers are still often ingrained in traditional joint life approaches, creating barriers.”
“Joint life plans, especially for mortgages, rarely result in payouts being fully used for the debt they cover.”
“Two singles cost only about 10% more than a joint plan, but you gain double the cover and significantly more flexibility.”
“The flexibility of single life policies is critical, especially for underwriting outcomes. For example, one partner might have an impairment, and it’s better to get the other covered as soon as possible rather than delay both.”
“Joint policies often mean losing key benefits for families, such as children’s cover or other riders. These can make a big difference at the point of claim.”
“Clients often worry about cost, but single life policies aren’t double the price. For less than 10% more, you can offer much better value and protection.”
Click the audio playback below to listen to the full session.
Full session audio
“People aren’t necessarily getting married anymore; they’re cohabiting, and women are earning more. This shift means separate finances and separate protection needs are more common.”
“At claim stage, a joint life policy is straightforward to process and aligns with client expectations for swift payouts. But, without trusts, these can create legal and tax delays.”
“Menu plans allow tailored protection to fit budgets while offering potential discounts and additional benefits. They can simplify claim processes by consolidating policies.”
“Joint life policies might feel simpler, but they don’t reflect the changing dynamics of modern relationships. Single life plans align better with how families actually live and manage their finances today.”
“Much of the industry still holds onto the legacy of joint life being the default. But that thinking needs to evolve to meet consumer needs better.”
“Trusts are crucial in mitigating delays at claim stage and addressing legal or tax complexities, especially for unmarried couples.”
“The beauty of being an adviser is recommending solutions best suited to the client at that point in time. Providers should focus on offering flexibility and operational simplicity.”
“While Exeter focuses on single life plans due to the pre-existing condition market, blending multiple providers and using menu plans can provide significant value to clients.”
“Providers need to focus on offering flexible, simple options that advisers can adapt to the needs of their clients, whether that’s single life or menu plans.”
“Our focus on single life reflects the needs of our target clients, who often have multiple pre-existing conditions. Offering them tailored, individual policies ensures they get the best possible cover.”
“Blending policies across providers or using menu plans gives advisers more tools to deliver value, especially when age-costed premiums or complex health histories are involved.”
