|
Panthrax posted:No, two different insurance companies, old is United Healthcare, new is Cigna. And like I said, unless something disastrous happens, I should be fine. I don't have any chronic issues, and I just had a Dr. apt which cost me $85 out of pocket. That's a whole lot cheaper than $700. The exact number is 63 days. HIPPA permits up to a 63 day gap in coverage before preexisting condition exclusion clauses can kick in again. End of January to beginning of April is cutting it close, you should really go count the exact number of days. Also, as you already seem to know COBRA allows you to backdate coverage if it becomes necessary (so you only have to pay those months if it turns out you need it).
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2013 18:16
|
|
In any case, I guess if it really comes down to it I can always pay the $700 if I really really need it before the new insurance kicks in, since I'll still be within the 2 month grace period.
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:54 |
|
|
Gold and a Pager posted:What's the consensus on car insurance for a rental car? I'm flying into LA for six days to visit a friend, but I don't own a car (and thus don't already have car insurance). He's going to have to work some of the days I'm there so I figured I'd rent a car to get around. I was looking and it looks like in California, a "Collision Damage Waiver" is pretty standard so if I end up doing minor damage to the car, that's covered. Am I right in thinking that if I get into a wreck, I'd be hosed unless I bought the extra $9-14 a day extended protection? LA traffic is crazy, especially if you've never been there before. It is very tempting to skip the CDW since it adds so much per day, but for six days in LA you should really consider getting it. You should be aware of two other good options though: 1. Pay with an American Express card, and you get some amount of free SECONDARY coverage. This means any damage/theft claim goes through your primary car insurance first (thus raising rates), and then Amex will cover the rest, up to some limit which I don't know. Details here: https://www.americanexpress.com/us/content/card-benefits/car-rental-insurance.html 2. Pay with an American Express card, but first enroll in their premium car rental insurance service. This is a one time $25 fee each time you rent a car but it works for the whole rental period and offers PRIMARY insurance, meaning that for theft and damage, Amex will pay first, and you don't even have to inform your regular insurance company. Details here: https://www295.americanexpress.com/...ental-LearnMore I think Visa has a very similar program now, too. On the other hand, the CDW from the rental company is exceptionally easy to deal with compared to getting a third party involved. If you get the CDW, you can pretty much drive through a shopping mall, off a bridge and/or into the ocean and you won't pay a dime, nor will you have a drawn out claims process like you might with Amex. You pretty much just call them up and tell them the car is hosed up, please bring another one. And then you drive away. edit: Actually, somebody has already done all this research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damage_waiver#Credit_card_coverage_of_damage_waiver. No guarantees of accuracy though. Magic Underwear fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Apr 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
Goontastic posted:Trying to help a friend out: If the condition is life threatening, go to an ER, they will operate no matter what. Otherwise I'd say seek out some kind of charity care program at the (any) hospital.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2013 21:47
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I am ready to defend what I said. You're totally misrepresenting the point of life insurance. In your first option the death benefit will almost ALWAYS be bigger than the investment. That is the point of life insurance, to get back MORE than what you put away. If I invest say, over 50 years, $30,000 into a life insurance policy with a $500,000 death benefit and maybe $40,000 in investment, then I come out ahead. I had in equity $70,000 and my beneficiaries receive $500,000. How is that worse than investing $30,000 and having $70,000 taxable to my beneficiaries? This is really stupid. If the insurance is the important part, then what you really want is term insurance. If investment is the important part, you get more flexibility, lower fees, and more exposure to market appreciation by simply investing it yourself. You are right that you are paying for a guaranteed death benefit, but how many people actually need that? If I die at 90, my grown children don't need a death benefit. Basically, there are people for whom whole life is appropriate, but not that many. Insurance brokers push it without regard to its appropriateness because it makes the broker so much in commissions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 02:46
|
|
|
Cheston posted:Thanks for the replies! I meant to ask whether the death benefit specifically was adjusted for inflation, but from your answers it sounds like neither the benefit nor the payments are. Doesn't this make the benefit significantly less over time? Because at 1-3% inflation, it seems like any benefit would be worth a third or less its current value in 60 years, which doesn't seem like it'd be worth it even if the premiums would also decrease due to inflation. Are you sure you even need life insurance? You didn't mention any wife or kids or anything. If you are just a single dude there is really no reason to buy any life insurance. The biggest use of life insurance is to replace your income for people who rely on your income to live. As for whole life and other permanent insurance schemes, I don't recommend it. It is right for some people, but only a very small portion of the population benefits from whole life more than they would from buying simple, cheap term insurance and investing the difference between the term premium and the whole premium. Whole life comes with many hidden fees and mechanisms that limit the growth of your money, to the advantage of the insurance company. Check out the Bogleheads forum, they have a lot of great info about whole vs term, among other solid financial advice.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:The whole "get in now when you're 20" thing stems from the idea that you'll eventually have those people depending on you, and it'd be better to have a locked in lower rate than waiting to take the plunge. Except for all those premiums that you'll being paying for no good reason while you have no dependents. Now, if you're fairly confident you will develop a serious illness between now and then, I guess it could be good. But how many people can be confident of that? sheri posted:Is there any reason we should be getting life insurance for a baby? I'm getting tons of poo poo in the mail about it and I'm not seeing the need... I don't see any reason to do so except maybe a small cheap plan to cover the rare and very sad possibility of needing funeral costs for an infant. That would only be a few thousand. Otherwise there is no good reason to speculate against the life of your child.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:54 |
|
|
Scrapez posted:Do you know any information specific to AAA?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 03:08
|
|