I've been waiting for someone from the UK to weigh in on how it works over there. They've had socialized medicine a long time now and plenty of Brits smoke.
Calling all people with background in the insurance industry...
- Thread starter DC2
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
This was the conclusion I had come to after reading many threads where insurance people had chimed in.
In fact, my conclusion was that if you were ever told that vaping was okay with your insurance, you better get that in writing.
But the other day there was a thread and a guy with extensive experience in the insurance industry said differently.
He was basically saying to go ahead and claim non-smoker, beat any tests you might have to take, and don't worry about a thing.
Actually, he was not only saying this, he was insisting that any thoughts to the contrary were just silly.
He said nobody was ever going to find out, and if they did a court of law would never back them in not paying a claim.
I was sure hoping he would find his way in here and we could get this party started.
This is an extremely important topic, and I would love to get to the bottom of it.
Vaping didn't start last week. I would think that insurance companies would have already addressed the issue. Like DC2 said, it would be helpful to know what this position is.
But the other day there was a thread and a guy with extensive experience in the insurance industry said differently.
He was basically saying to go ahead and claim non-smoker, beat any tests you might have to take, and don't worry about a thing.
Actually, he was not only saying this, he was insisting that any thoughts to the contrary were just silly.
He said nobody was ever going to find out, and if they did a court of law would never back them in not paying a claim.
I was sure hoping he would find his way in here and we could get this party started.
This is an extremely important topic, and I would love to get to the bottom of it.[/QUOTE]
Now how does that make you feel Comfortable with lying on app or maybe that you are rolling the dice
Bottom line the insurance company will not want to pay any claim they don't have to
if there is evidence that you lied and it is not past a time period for them to contest they will not pay
you see the stories all the time people lie to get coverage to pay for something they know they will have to do
like when they first find out there pregnant or read about a guy that lied about his heart condition didn't get his claims paid
yes some will slip past the goalie others will not
He was basically saying to go ahead and claim non-smoker, beat any tests you might have to take, and don't worry about a thing.
Actually, he was not only saying this, he was insisting that any thoughts to the contrary were just silly.
He said nobody was ever going to find out, and if they did a court of law would never back them in not paying a claim.
I was sure hoping he would find his way in here and we could get this party started.
This is an extremely important topic, and I would love to get to the bottom of it.[/QUOTE]
Now how does that make you feel Comfortable with lying on app or maybe that you are rolling the dice
Bottom line the insurance company will not want to pay any claim they don't have to
if there is evidence that you lied and it is not past a time period for them to contest they will not pay
you see the stories all the time people lie to get coverage to pay for something they know they will have to do
like when they first find out there pregnant or read about a guy that lied about his heart condition didn't get his claims paid
yes some will slip past the goalie others will not
I'm talking about health insurance, not life insurance.
Smoking related issues tend to affect people later in life. You don't see a lot of 20 year olds with COPD or emphysema. Statistics don't lie. Those who smoke or are obese have far greater health issues than those who don't and those of normal weight. Insurance companies work off of actuary tables, which are a good predictor of how much of a risk someone is.
I think as long as vaping resembles smoking, there will be a qualifier about tobacco or nicotine use.
As early adopters, we're taking a reasonable leap of faith that vaping is no more harmful than energy drinks or pesticide treated veggies. Until there is a solid body of data collected over decades, I don't see the insurance industry differentiating vaping and smoking.
As early adopters, we're taking a reasonable leap of faith that vaping is no more harmful than energy drinks or pesticide treated veggies. Until there is a solid body of data collected over decades, I don't see the insurance industry differentiating vaping and smoking.
Maybe so, but this isn't just about vaping, it's also about NRT products.
Like you, DC2, I had high hopes for this thread and don't mind bumping it to keep it TTT.
Ahh okies.. was thinking life insurance. Considering the only reason homo sapiens live as long as they do know is because of the advent of modern medicine. It could be exacerbation on a cause that the human would have already had.
My mother has never drank.. never smoked.. never lived in a family that smoked and has come down with 3 forms of cancer.
Quite frankly.. it could be an anomoly (I am sure we all know some one like this). Honestly I think it is horse bonkey. It is a combo of the persons lifestyle. The health issues aren't necessarily a cause of smoking or being overweight. Those health issues were already there, social eco issue and genetics. Smoking and obesity just brought it on faster as harder.
No I am not a medical doctor and will never claim to be.
Then again I just had 2 of these...Caffeine, citric acid, potassium benzoate, phosphoric acid, aspartame, caramel color, carbonated water.
Phosphoric acid uses : rust inhibitor, food additive, dental and orthop(a)edic etchant, electrolyte, flux, dispersing agent, industrial etchant, fertilizer feedstock, and component of home cleaning products
Potassium benzoate when mixed with vitamin C and sodium creates Benzene.
Approx 1.7 billion servings of it are made every day.
Guess some poison are okay'd by the FDA while others aren't.
I was wondering this myself. A friend of mine quit smoking MANY years ago but still chewed nicotine gum when he drank so he could fend off the urge to bum smokes from people. He just passed away last Friday (love ya Jim! - gonna miss our happy hours)
I wonder if he had any issues maintaining adiquate health insurance after retirement due to his "nicotine habit" via a perfectly legal, and even widespread medically acceptable therapy. I am also wondering if he had life insurance and if that might be affected. Hopefully not but, insurance is a business and they're not going to pay for anything they can argue their way out of. They have shareholders to look out for afterall...
1st your giving an example in a negative tone when you don't know anything about his ins situation or how nicotine effected it
That is no better then the negative tone these doctors Ive seen on the news give when talking about the ecigg when really they don't know and have nothing to show
2nd Ins is a transfer of risk
you are paying someone to take your risk they are making an offer based on what they feel the risk is worth to them
At least I has been but we are transitioning to health care which is different and has a much higher cost
Here is my take on the whole insurance scam ..er situation. If you are I am asked on an enrollment form (or ANY form for that matter) if you I "smoke", "use tobacco products", "use nicotine", etc ...(I) ALWAYS SAY NO. Unless they plan to do a medical test for nicotine at that very moment, you aren't I am not required to 'report' to anyone changes in your my (health) situation; therefore, they can't claim you were I was fraudulent or deceitful because you I can claim you I started AFTER you I completed their form and they can't PROVE otherwise. That's why those people in the know say that denials of claims for these reasons wouldn't stand up in a court of law. (<- Hearsay) The question is meant to trap ignorant (as in, 'unknowing', not 'stupid') people into disclosing pre-existing conditions. As far as any insurance form (or any form, for that matter) I've ever completed wanting to know my current medical conditions, I'm a poster child of perfect health, clean living, and eating right (at that exact moment in time ;-P).
Now, with that said,be I am very, VERY cognizant of the wording of the questions. (I) read what Verhhall said ...then (I) read it again.
youme. They have entire multiple-storied buildings full of people who are probably smarter than you me that do nothing but sit around and think of ways to do exactly 2 things: 1) get you Me to pay them more money and 2) get them to pay you me less money.
Many insurance questionnaires are going to these types of 'historically'-worded questions - from "do you currently" to "have you ever" - then they can use their 'pre-existing condition' clause of that policy to determine, fromyour my answers to those questions, what is actually considered 'pre-existing' ...effectively forcing you me to legally disclose. When you I encounter these questions, it is I find it best to WRITE IN added details to the side rather than simply check the box, even if they don't provide you the room for it. For example, "Have you ever smoked cigarettes?" - check the YES box, but then (I) write in off to the side of the question, "Quit <date>" with the date being some # of months/years ago (hey, they can't prove otherwise). Just providing you me with a check box without any clarification as to exactly WHEN allows them to ASSUME (without any information to the contrary) that your my smoking of cigarettes/use of tobacco/use of nicotine does not meet the pre-existing exclusion time limit for your my state. I don't know how up-to-date it is, but here is the wiki and highlights each state's pre-existing exclusions: Pre-existing Conditions.
Of course, your mileage may vary. Sure, it's easy to say thatyou I might be able to win in court, blah blah blah ...but all insurance companies require mediation/arbitration as a term of their policy acceptance to resolve claim disagreements. The only insurance cases that actually get to legal trial are those that involve serious criminal activity and mediation/arbitration is typically not as favorable to a policy holder in regards to their judgement. This is because, in this arena, it's a contractual argument, not a legal one.
Edit: Happy now, Pete?
Now, with that said,
Insurance companies are smart - probably smarter than
Many insurance questionnaires are going to these types of 'historically'-worded questions - from "do you currently" to "have you ever" - then they can use their 'pre-existing condition' clause of that policy to determine, from
Of course, your mileage may vary. Sure, it's easy to say that
Edit: Happy now, Pete?
Last edited:
actually healthy people should pay less.
your insurence is based by pooling every one in the specified group,assessing the risks.and
splitting the costs amoungst all.
this idea of charging more for(insert your problem here) is a canard.
regards
mike
that's a lot of advice from someone who isn't a lawyer, insurance executive, or actually in-the-know about specific insurance questions. my advice for anyone is to ignore anything you read or hear on a forum(or anywhere) and find out the facts from someone qualified to give answers. it's one thing to get advice about how to make a coil, etc. it's another thing to get life altering legal advice. do you really want to tell an insurance company or a judge, "well I read it on the ECF so it must be true".......
I don't know about anyone else but I would be willing to pay a significant amount of money for some ejuice which contains nicotine extracted from eggplants or tomatoes. Then I could answer 'no' to any question about using tobacco products.
A question:
The insurance companies have oodles of data, tables, and studies which justify the elevated insurance costs with smoking. This is the basis for charging an elevated premium for insuring smokers.
Should they not have to gather similar evidence to charge vapers similarly elevated premiums?
Tapped out
The insurance companies have oodles of data, tables, and studies which justify the elevated insurance costs with smoking. This is the basis for charging an elevated premium for insuring smokers.
Should they not have to gather similar evidence to charge vapers similarly elevated premiums?
Tapped out
Why would they? That means they would have to charge you less, and make less profit off you. I think it's safe to say that business, especially in america, is all about profits, at ANY cost. Do you think a big pharma company would not kill you in a NY minute if they stood to make a $billion off the drug that did it? They do that every day.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
