I have a client making a claim on a critical illness (CI) policy. The provider is suggesting they take a lump sum payment rather than the family income benefit (FIB) they originally bought. I realise there are various arguments for each side, but what would be the one that swings it toward FIB?
Alan Lakey Highclere Financial Services Critical illness cover within a family income benefit plan is relatively uncommon. Few providers offer it and even fewer advisers recommend it. So within this scenario, choosing FIB suggests that the matter was considered carefully by both adviser and client, and that the plan was selected precisely because an income was more desirable than a capital sum. Of course, circumstances may have changed and commuting to a lump sum may now be advantageous, particularly if a mortgage or debt exists that cannot otherwise be repaid. H...
To continue reading this article...
Join Professional Adviser for free
- Unlimited access to real-time news, industry insights and market intelligence
- Stay ahead of the curve with spotlights on emerging trends and technologies
- Receive breaking news stories straight to your inbox in the daily newsletters
- Make smart business decisions with the latest developments in regulation, investing retirement and protection
- Members-only access to the editor’s weekly Friday commentary
- Be the first to hear about our events and awards programmes