Lifetime Community Rating coming in on 1 May

Have been reading about the change in the law in May which will mean anyone over 34 will be penalised if they take out health insurance after that date. I am unsure of what to do now. I am 49 and husband is 52 and we have never had private health insurance. Both fairly healthy though I do have a disc problem at present. Should we take out cover and if so what package do we go for. Needless to say money is an issue.

If you can take health insurance now without an age penalty , I would suggest do it, if you can afford it.

There are too many plans to give you good advice on which one .
So all I can do is give my view ,

I am happy nuff to stay in Public Hospitals ,
If I get sick I am prepared to share room with others.
I do though, want the facility to see a Consultant in a reasonable time frame.It is for that facilty (queue jumping) that I am prepared to pay for.
In general we are all covered in Public Health for life threatening Heart/Cancer.
If you find that next year ,it is too dear etc , you can then cancel.

From today's Indo
Battle hots up, but be wary of new low-cost health schemes
http://www.independent.ie/business/...y-of-new-lowcost-health-schemes-31011018.html

With the May deadline approaching, there's plenty of competition for new business...policies from €8 per week

That's it exactly Gerry - the public system does the job it is just if you need a non urgent operation or need to see a consultant that it sucks. So I want to be able to see a consultant within a reasonable timeframe if I am referred. So do the new plans under 500 cover this? When I look at the information all they seem to talk about is cover in public hospitals and semi private rooms! Don't actually specify if you can see a consultant, if you have to pay up front and claim it back etc.

On the news to night , it quoted the following

It will mean people over the age of 34 who take out health insurance for the first time, or after a long break, will face a 2% per year penalty on their health insurance.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0304/684326-varadkar-to-launch-late-entry-health-insurance/


What would a long break entail? a year, 5 years??

This whole scenario has placed me in something of a dilemma I have to say (as I think is the purposeful intention of the health insurance companies and the minister working in cahoots)

Personally I think this whole drive is the initial step to pave the way for a the introduction of UHC costing probably more than €1200 per head in a few years time. In other words this is a softening up exercise aimed at getting people (like me who have consciously up to now opted not to have private health insurance) used to paying in the context that it won't be as big of an "upsell" to the UHC when introduced. I feel it's a form of moral black mail and in essence putting a virtual gun to people's heads by introducing both a deadline, a penalty premium system and a fear factor. And the frightening thing is it's working. My wife heard something about it on the radio and asked me to look into it. I'd already been thinking about investigating it anyway because of the publicity.

So the way I see it from what I've read is, if people like me and the wife (healthy with no history of illness, both in our 40's) are going to sign up, it's best to sign up for the bare min of cover with premiums under €500 each. Once we're "in the door" and have passed the qualification periods we can up our cover without penalty if something arises in the medical area. Also I'm inclined to think that additional premiums for family cover of the kids is unnecessary or a waste unless they have some foreseeable issues like grommet requirements or orthodontics.

So that's where I'm at. Chances are we probably will sign up before the May 1st deadline but I still find it highly objectionable both on moral and fiscal grounds, from the perspective that I already contribute PRSI and USC and get nothing for either (at least once I used get my teeth checked and cleaned for free, now it costs me €100 a year) and also because I feel it's funding and facilitating and perpetuating a highly dysfunctional, greedy and morally reprehensible private healthcare industrial complex that's headed the way of the US system (Why couldn't I just book into the presidential suite in Ashford castle for a week and let the medical team attend me there. It'd work out cheaper than a private hospital room with food and service that one is probably to sick to appreciate anyway)

I'd be interested in the perspective of others cos I'm still torn about whether I'm better off paying into this "scam" or banking the premiums in a "medical fund" a/c on the basis that any care in the public system has a maximum cap on what you can be charged (dunno if this is true but apparently you can't be charged any more than €175 p/w or €750 pa in public hospital accommodation?) and that 5 years of premiums would pay a good chunk of medical expenses if needed.

Of course if either of us were sick or had particular symptoms (like other cases evidenced on this site) I imagine my perspective would be considerably different.

Yes, hosp care is 75 pn, with a max of 750 pa.

pjordan,

note that if UHI is introduced, your tax bill will drop as the Govt will no longer have to fund hosps.

So Govt spending will drop by several billion, meaning either lower deficits, or lower taxes.

Protocol said:

pjordan,

note that if UHI is introduced, your tax bill will drop as the Govt will no longer have to fund hosps.

So Govt spending will drop by several billion, meaning either lower deficits, or lower taxes.

Click to expand...

I'm sure it will

pjordan said:

I'd be interested in the perspective of others cos I'm still torn about whether I'm better off paying into this "scam" or banking the premiums in a "medical fund" a/c on the basis that any care in the public system has a maximum cap on what you can be charged (dunno if this is true but apparently you can't be charged any more than €175 p/w or €750 pa in public hospital accommodation?) and that 5 years of premiums would pay a good chunk of medical expenses if needed.

Of course if either of us were sick or had particular symptoms (like other cases evidenced on this site) I imagine my perspective would be considerably different.

Click to expand...

I agree with your post above. I see this as another tax on the real working class in this country, though I doubt the likes of TASC will deem it as such when they next issue a report to say how little tax the 40-100k cohort pay in this country. Tax by the back door yet again with FG.

I feel I have no choice now but to sign up as the penalties will outweigh another few years of sitting it out. I think the idea of building up a health fund is good in theory, but quickly falls apart if serious illness affects you at a later stage.

I crunched some numbers to see how this would work out for someone that is impacted as the rules are introduced. I've based the spreadsheet on someone aged 35 and so would have a health loading of 2% if they waited until later in the year to get a policy. If they wait 5 years, they would have those savings over the 5 years to put towards future premiums. Same again if they waited another 5 years. Obviously these periods would not be covered if health issues arose but I was just trying to see what the cost of waiting is.

I've done up the attached simple spreadsheet on the basis that policies will increase in real terms at 2% p.a. and then with the 2% loading for each year, the longer you wait the less you would pay overall, despite the loading. Any thoughts? I've used 100 as a base cost.

partnership said:

That's it exactly Gerry - the public system does the job it is just if you need a non urgent operation or need to see a consultant that it sucks. So I want to be able to see a consultant within a reasonable timeframe if I am referred. So do the new plans under 500 cover this? When I look at the information all they seem to talk about is cover in public hospitals and semi private rooms! Don't actually specify if you can see a consultant, if you have to pay up front and claim it back etc.

Click to expand...

This is possibly the most frustrating part of research all this, even on the HIA website, which seems to be geared more to suit the Health Insurers marketing approach than to facilitate clear unambigious comparisons (of course if the HIA website did that I imagine the insurers would cry foul as it would inhibit them from selling such a confusing multiplicity of different priced products and covers).

I'm not preoccupied with having a private or semi private room in a public hospital, but I would like a policy that would give me access to treatment or a consultant promptly if I needed it. Are these two issues mutually exclusive or can you get cover for that without the private room/private hospital option (or is the reality that to access this kind of the treatment the package comes as a private room in a private hospital ONLY?)

Hi all,

I'm been looking at some calculations on this.

Looking at [broken link removed] I can't seem to work out their maths?

I tick all the boxes saying that I've never had health insurance or lived aboard etc, and put in my age, and it suggests a 2% loading.

I then assumed a policy cost of €1000,

It suggests a loaded premium of €1024 - i.e 2.4%
I played with some other dates of birth, it said a loading of 22%, and again with a policy of €1000, but it suggests a loaded premium of €1264 i.e. 26.4%
I pretended I was quite mature, so it suggested the max loading of 70%, and again with a policy of €1000, it said the loaded premium would be €1840. i.e. 84%

What's going on here? What am I missing?

CG12

Looks like Lifetime Community Rating loadings are applied to the gross premium.

If your net premium is €1000 then that includes Tax Relief at Source (TRS) of €200 so your actual gross premium is €1200.

Applying a 2% loading to €1200 gives you €1224 gross. Minus the €200 maximum TRS brings you down to €1024.

HIA could do with pointing that out as it is confusing. Especially as prices are nearly always quoted Net (and the calculator specifically asks you for the Net price) so many don't even realise they are getting tax relief.

Protocol said:

note that if UHI is introduced, your tax bill will drop as the Govt will no longer have to fund hosps.

So Govt spending will drop by several billion, meaning either lower deficits, or lower taxes.

Click to expand...

I am not sure about how UHI will work but will there not be a very high % of the population that will effectively have their contribution paid from taxation thereby costing a huge sum of money.
Will UHI not have the unintended consequence of getting people to work where they are working close enough to the point of where they might be liable/not liable to pay for the UHI.
I am not disagreeing with the concept as it has been explained but somewhat sceptical about all the possible abuses can be prevented.

BazzaDP said:

Looks like Lifetime Community Rating loadings are applied to the gross premium.

If your net premium is €1000 then that includes Tax Relief at Source (TRS) of €200 so your actual gross premium is €1200.

Applying a 2% loading to €1200 gives you €1224 gross. Minus the €200 maximum TRS brings you down to €1024.

HIA could do with pointing that out as it is confusing. Especially as prices are nearly always quoted Net (and the calculator specifically asks you for the Net price) so many don't even realise they are getting tax relief.

Click to expand...

Q4 of the HIA LCR information section on their site

What loadings will apply?
A loading of 2% of the gross premium will apply for every year of age higher than age 34 that an individual has attained when they first purchase inpatient private health insurance after 30 April 2015.

Thanks BazzaDP & Mexicola. That makes more sense now.

All the prices quoted on both the HIA insurance comparison page, and all the PHI companies show the net price. You need to go digging to see the gross. As someone with no PHI, and no knowledge of the 'system', I assumed the quoted price was gross, and 20% was claimed back from revenue afterwards!

CG12

It's tax relief AT SOURCE so the health insurance company takes care of that for you.

And still think that could be made clearer on the calculator to avoid this confusion - am sure you're not the only one confused by this