Excess and wait period

Bassmansam · 22 Mar 2017 at 10:55

In December i took out income protection in December. I had a look at the policy last night as i am in process if buying my first property. It states that the excess period is 60 days and the waiting period is 90 days. When i took it out initially i was aware that I would not be able to claim for 90 days but where has his 60 day additonal wait time come from?

Also don't both terms essentially have the same meaning?

Dsteviedee · 22 Mar 2017 at 11:25

I Believe, the wait period is how long you have to wait for payout.
The excess period is the time you would have to be off work before the policy would start to pay out.
Could be wrong though, as I have seen them refferred to as the same thing also.

Hades · 22 Mar 2017 at 14:42

I agree on the excess period. The wit period could be the period you wait for the payout. Or it could be the period you have to wait at the start of the policy for cover to be effective. For example you may need to wait a month before you are insured as this stops people hearing of redundancies and immediately taking out cover before they are announced. I know my policy had this.

Bassmansam · 22 Mar 2017 at 15:27

Hades said:
I agree on the excess period. The wit period could be the period you wait for the payout. Or it could be the period you have to wait at the start of the policy for cover to be effective. For example you may need to wait a month before you are insured as this stops people hearing of redundancies and immediately taking out cover before they are announced. I know my policy had this.

It has an initial exclusion period of 120 days which ends 19th April, so im still confused as to what the difference betwren the terms are.

Hades · 22 Mar 2017 at 15:32

In that case I'd agree with no payment for 3 months (excess) and then payment in arrears by 1 month (wait). So you'd get you first payment after 4 months. But you should probably check with the company directly.

Bassmansam · 22 Mar 2017 at 15:46

Will do but it seems only contactable by phone so thought i'd ask in here. Thanks anyway.

BDEE · 22 Mar 2017 at 15:56

Essentially, you have to be incapacitated for 60 days before you can claim on the policy.

However no claim will be accepted for any occurrence of incapacity during the first 90 days of the policy. So if you got sick on day 89, then this is not eligible for claim, even after a 60 day period of incapacity.

It is to stop people taking out insurance on the basis they know they are ill and about to go and see the doctors about it and take out the cover to expect to then claim.

It might be the other way around - can't tell from the wording - So it might be 90 days before a claim and nothing paying in the first 60 - Looking at the policy it should make more sense applying these definitions.

Bassmansam · 22 Mar 2017 at 16:23

BDEE said:
Essentially, you have to be incapacitated for 60 days before you can claim on the policy.

However no claim will be accepted for any occurrence of incapacity during the first 90 days of the policy. So if you got sick on day 89, then this is not eligible for claim, even after a 60 day period of incapacity.

It is to stop people taking out insurance on the basis they know they are ill and about to go and see the doctors about it and take out the cover to expect to then claim.

It might be the other way around - can't tell from the wording - So it might be 90 days before a claim and nothing paying in the first 60 - Looking at the policy it should make more sense applying these definitions.

But the policy states a 120 day initial exclusion period. Then these two terms of 60 and 90 days, very confusing.

BDEE · 22 Mar 2017 at 16:40

Oh - Well then that is indeed unusual. Have you got the exact wording? Or a link to the providers policy wording online?