Did I get ripped off with this life insurance policy? (pay, million)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm almost 30 and opened a policy only a year ago after my daughter was born. I opened a policy of 400K with monthly premiums of 125 a month. I probably could've done just 300K to cover the house and then some, but....I didn't. At the time of talking to the agent, I was convinced whole was the way to go, and so I picked it. A year later, I get a statement in the mail that says my "coverage" is guaranteed until age 62. But my coverage COULD last until 79 base based on non-guaranteed assumptions....
To me it seems better to do term life insurance and pay a fraction of what I'm paying down. The rest can be invested somewhere else.
I just don't want to croak at 65 when I could possibly still need to work and run the risk of not benefiting from the insurance policy. Had a friend whose grandfather cancelled (why??) his life insurance policy, died 2 years later at 74, and because he was supporting his wife and some of his children, the house he took a second mortgage out on had to be sold >_>
The OP just made an insurance agent very happy since they collect enormous commission dollars on that kind of policy.
If it's offered in your state, savings bank life insurance tends to be the best deal in term insurance. $400K is an absurdly low policy unless your spouse has a good, high-paying job or at least has the education and job skills to obtain a good, high-paying job.
I'm almost 30 and opened a policy only a year ago after my daughter was born. I opened a policy of 400K with monthly premiums of 125 a month. I probably could've done just 300K to cover the house and then some, but....I didn't. At the time of talking to the agent, I was convinced whole was the way to go, and so I picked it. A year later, I get a statement in the mail that says my "coverage" is guaranteed until age 62. But my coverage COULD last until 79 base based on non-guaranteed assumptions....
To me it seems better to do term life insurance and pay a fraction of what I'm paying down. The rest can be invested somewhere else.
I just don't want to croak at 65 when I could possibly still need to work and run the risk of not benefiting from the insurance policy. Had a friend whose grandfather cancelled (why??) his life insurance policy, died 2 years later at 74, and because he was supporting his wife and some of his children, the house he took a second mortgage out on had to be sold >_>
What are your thoughts on this policy I have?
I have a 15 year term 500k for $29 a month. I was 32 when I got it
To me, it doesn't sound like you have whole life. Sounds more like universal life. With whole life, premium is usually quoted to get you coverage through age 100. Universal life coverage length is determined by how much you pay vs how much the company is charging you for the insurance and the crediting interest rate.... under current environment conditions and guaranteed conditions.
I'm almost 30 and opened a policy only a year ago after my daughter was born. I opened a policy of 400K with monthly premiums of 125 a month. I probably could've done just 300K to cover the house and then some, but....I didn't. At the time of talking to the agent, I was convinced whole was the way to go, and so I picked it. A year later, I get a statement in the mail that says my "coverage" is guaranteed until age 62. But my coverage COULD last until 79 base based on non-guaranteed assumptions....
To me it seems better to do term life insurance and pay a fraction of what I'm paying down. The rest can be invested somewhere else.
I just don't want to croak at 65 when I could possibly still need to work and run the risk of not benefiting from the insurance policy. Had a friend whose grandfather cancelled (why??) his life insurance policy, died 2 years later at 74, and because he was supporting his wife and some of his children, the house he took a second mortgage out on had to be sold >_>
What are your thoughts on this policy I have?
Do what YOU thought and get term, with renewable at term end.
Dump the policy you got a year ago after you get your term in place.
Yes it's a ripoff. Yes the agent makes $$$$$$ on your policy, that's why they wrangled you into it.
I got wrangled into one at age 23, and didn't even need life insurance. 5 years later, after a $400/yr premium, the policy was worth like $10, not even kidding.
Then the company went bankrupt, the policy was absorbed by anotger insurance company at $0 worth, higher premium as I had aged, and start all over again. I said take a hike.
Never again with either whole life or universal life. I should get a new policy but I've aged a LOT since that while life policy and it's rather expensive for term for me now as I'm also disabled with a heart condition.
Do what YOU thought and get term, with renewable at term end.
Dump the policy you got a year ago after you get your term in place.
Yes it's a ripoff. Yes the agent makes $$$$$$ on your policy, that's why they wrangled you into it.
I got wrangled into one at age 23, and didn't even need life insurance. 5 years later, after a $400/yr premium, the policy was worth like $10, not even kidding.
Then the company went bankrupt, the policy was absorbed by anotger insurance company at $0 worth, higher premium as I had aged, and start all over again. I said take a hike.
Never again with either whole life or universal life. I should get a new policy but I've aged a LOT since that while life policy and it's rather expensive for term for me now as I'm also disabled with a heart condition.
I'm almost 30 and opened a policy only a year ago after my daughter was born. I opened a policy of 400K with monthly premiums of 125 a month. I probably could've done just 300K to cover the house and then some, but....I didn't. At the time of talking to the agent, I was convinced whole was the way to go, and so I picked it. A year later, I get a statement in the mail that says my "coverage" is guaranteed until age 62. But my coverage COULD last until 79 base based on non-guaranteed assumptions....
To me it seems better to do term life insurance and pay a fraction of what I'm paying down. The rest can be invested somewhere else.
I just don't want to croak at 65 when I could possibly still need to work and run the risk of not benefiting from the insurance policy. Had a friend whose grandfather cancelled (why??) his life insurance policy, died 2 years later at 74, and because he was supporting his wife and some of his children, the house he took a second mortgage out on had to be sold >_>
What are your thoughts on this policy I have?
i have 2 20 year term life policies. i got them both in my early 30's.
$3 million - $102.70/month
$1 million - $38.69/month
i feel that the 20 year will cover enough time for me to accumulate enough to cover any issues for my family. so far, so good. you need to make that call on your own. i definitely feel choosing term is better than whole.
You didn't get "ripped off" per se, you just didn't buy the most optimal coverage for your situation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
