Your suggestions for underwritten MedSupps/Plan G

[yorkriver1]

Hoping to avoid the big rate increases that some carriers who do loss leader rates have to do. My prospect's adult child is managing the money. Aetna Life and Health rates went up for 10/1/23, Plan G about to be $209/month. The prospect is T76 in October.
I have been approached by the adult child for advice about medically underwritten alternatives that might have a decent chance of rate stability.
Medical the usual cholesterol/blood pressure meds, + thyroid. Health probably will pass, Ht/Wt ok.
Choices now for lower rates:
Medico(Wellable)
AARP UHC (no UHICA in our state, Virginia) doesn't save much, but hopes for stable rates
Humana
Anthem BCBS no big savings, but age rating stops at age 75
Any suggestions wellcome.
Also ranking ease of medical underwriting process.
Thanks!

 

[somarco]

Medico(Wellable)
AARP UHC (no UHICA in our state, Virginia) doesn't save much, but hopes for stable rates
Humana
Anthem BCBS no big savings, but age rating stops at age 75
Any suggestions welcome.
Also ranking ease of medical underwriting process.

Personally I would pass on Medico/Wellable as well as Aetna and the subsidiaries.

UHC and Anthem are probably your best bet for stability. Underwriting can & will change over time . . . it has with both of those as well as other carriers so no way to factor in underwriting.

You might have a regional carrier that has been stable. I have used New Era/PALIC for almost 15 years and have about 250 clients with them. I don't write as much new with them any more, maybe half a dozen new cases per year plus some internal conversions (which pay FYC).

 

[rmhaire]

Hoping to avoid the big rate increases that some carriers who do loss leader rates have to do. My prospect's adult child is managing the money. Aetna Life and Health rates went up for 10/1/23, Plan G about to be $209/month. The prospect is T76 in October.
I have been approached by the adult child for advice about medically underwritten alternatives that might have a decent chance of rate stability.
Medical the usual cholesterol/blood pressure meds, + thyroid. Health probably will pass, Ht/Wt ok.
Choices now for lower rates:
Medico(Wellable)
AARP UHC (no UHICA in our state, Virginia) doesn't save much, but hopes for stable rates
Humana
Anthem BCBS no big savings, but age rating stops at age 75
Any suggestions wellcome.
Also ranking ease of medical underwriting process.
Thanks!

I heard from one of my FMO peeps this week that ACE/Chubb has a 5 year rate lock on their plan. Never heard that before and can't find anything on it on their website.

Might be worth checking out.

 

[somarco]

I heard from one of my FMO peeps this week that ACE/Chubb has a 5 year rate lock on their plan. Never heard that before and can't find anything on it on their website.

Might be worth checking out.

That's a pretty bold statement for a carrier that has only been in the Medigap market about a year.

FWIW, I haven't seen a "rate lock" on health insurance for 30 years. Penn Mutual tried that in the 70's with a 3 year lock on individual health insurance. Rate increases in year 4 drove off all that business.

 

[rmhaire]

That's a pretty bold statement for a carrier that has only been in the Medigap market about a year.

FWIW, I haven't seen a "rate lock" on health insurance for 30 years. Penn Mutual tried that in the 70's with a 3 year lock on individual health insurance. Rate increases in year 4 drove off all that business.

I remember Chubb from my p&c days. Solid company. I just don't see them jumping in and out like some companies are prone to do.

As far as the rate lock, that's about as rare as a handful of chicken beaks. But that's what I was told.

Maybe somebody on here that writes them will come back to us with a yes or no.

 

[somarco]

I remember Chubb from my p&c days.

As a parent company they do have a solid history but they have a sketchy record in the health insurance market.

Most likely scenario is, an intermediary approached them with a "can't miss" deal to enter the fast growing senior market. In exchange for using their paper to front the product, the intermediary sets up the TPA contracts to eliminate additional overhead and lays off 95% of the risk to reinsurance carriers. Chubb agrees to take 5% or less of the risk on a quota share basis.

So Chubb has very little skin in the game and they have easy entry, easy withdrawal if things don't go as planned.

The Medigap road is littered with bodies of carriers jumping in and jumping out of the market. It is a suckers bet with almost zero longevity.

 

[goillini52]

I heard from one of my FMO peeps this week that ACE/Chubb has a 5 year rate lock on their plan. Never heard that before and can't find anything on it on their website.

Might be worth checking out.

Sounds like a marketer doesn't know of what they speak. If they had that, they'd have it in print.

They recently had a 5% increase.

 

[yorkriver1]

Personally I would pass on Medico/Wellable as well as Aetna and the subsidiaries.

UHC and Anthem are probably your best bet for stability. Underwriting can & will change over time . . . it has with both of those as well as other carriers so no way to factor in underwriting.

You might have a regional carrier that has been stable. I have used New Era/PALIC for almost 15 years and have about 250 clients with them. I don't write as much new with them any more, maybe half a dozen new cases per year plus some internal conversions (which pay FYC).

Will talk to Anthem. Haven't discussed underwriting with them for a while. It's impossible to predict future rate increases, just sticking with large carriers who don't do a lot of closing off books of business.
Anthem stops age rating at age 75, but it occurs to me that they will have to do their rate increases based on losses overall anyway. At least they avoid the 2 times a year increases of some carriers. The prospect is just over 75. N was discussed, but rates are a non starter on one of the carriers, and the relative who does help with the prospective insured and the prospect don't want to look at bills. Although there is word out there that N is likely to have lower rate increases over time, I don't want to over promise on any aspect.

 

[somarco]

Anthem has fairly strict underwriting guidelines with no give. Anyone on any kind of BP med should be considered an auto decline. I haven't been able to slip anyone in for probably 2 years . . . decided to stop fighting and follow their rules. There are other carriers willing to bend, but not Anthem.

OTOH their rate increases in GA have been 4 - 6% for the last few years. Slightly higher for the old unisex block.

My N plan block has had very nominal increases with other carriers. I never found a reason to place N with Anthem, only G. The N plan becomes expensive when folks age and have multiple docs and multiple appointments each month so I discourage folks from taking the N.

You see, it's not the premium that is a killer, it's the utilization . . . something most agents can't comprehend or accept. If you can't pay your medical bills the health insurance doesn't do much good. Too many seniors are living on a skinny budget that doesn't have much room for surprise bills of any kind. Many have trouble paying unexpected bills that exceed $300 so how are they going to pay for cancer treatment?

Underwriting rules are getting tighter except with the new kids on the block who think they can make a niche by taking anyone who can fog a mirror. Problem is, those blocks blow up in a few years and then the carrier often retreats from the market.

You won't get consistently low rates from carriers that will write risks that other carriers decline. So you need to choose between rates or underwriting but you can't have both.

I have always looked for carriers with REASONABLE underwriting, competitive rates and the ability to survive in a market for at least 5 years. That approach has served me and my clients well.

 

[yorkriver1]

Anthem has fairly strict underwriting guidelines with no give. Anyone on any kind of BP med should be considered an auto decline. I haven't been able to slip anyone in for probably 2 years . . . decided to stop fighting and follow their rules. There are other carriers willing to bend, but not Anthem.

OTOH their rate increases in GA have been 4 - 6% for the last few years. Slightly higher for the old unisex block.

My N plan block has had very nominal increases with other carriers. I never found a reason to place N with Anthem, only G. The N plan becomes expensive when folks age and have multiple docs and multiple appointments each month so I discourage folks from taking the N.

You see, it's not the premium that is a killer, it's the utilization . . . something most agents can't comprehend or accept. If you can't pay your medical bills the health insurance doesn't do much good. Too many seniors are living on a skinny budget that doesn't have much room for surprise bills of any kind. Many have trouble paying unexpected bills that exceed $300 so how are they going to pay for cancer treatment?

Underwriting rules are getting tighter except with the new kids on the block who think they can make a niche by taking anyone who can fog a mirror. Problem is, those blocks blow up in a few years and then the carrier often retreats from the market.

You won't get consistently low rates from carriers that will write risks that other carriers decline. So you need to choose between rates or underwriting but you can't have both.

I have always looked for carriers with REASONABLE underwriting, competitive rates and the ability to survive in a market for at least 5 years. That approach has served me and my clients well.