Type: Group income protection
Minimum group size: Five
Minimum premium/minimum benefit: £750 a year/no minimum
Minimum-maximum ages: 16-69
Maximum benefit: Gross pay policies – 75% of salary with deduction for State Employment and Support Allowance or 80% of salary, including employee pension contribution, without ESA benefit subject to £300,000 a year maximum, integrated policies up to 80% of salary subject to £300,000 a year maximum
Options: Gross pay or integrated policy, limited benefit term options of two, three, four or five years, lump sum benefit option of up to four times salary subject to £1.6m maximum, escalating cover, extended cover after terminating age
Definitions of incapacity: Own occupation, suited occupation, benchmark or a combination of definitions
Deferred periods: 8, 13, 26, 28, 41 or 52 weeks, minimum 28 weeks for integrated policies
Commission: Initial 12% but negotiation possible
Tel: 0800 141 2002
Zurich Corporate Risk has made its debut in the group risk market with a group income protection plan that can be tailored towards employers’ budgets and employees’ needs. It is available on a gross pay or integrated basis and both types allow a choice in the definition of incapacity between own occupation, suited occupation and a benchmark based on performing the necessary duties of a benchmark occupation.
Considering how this product will be useful to advisers and their corporate clients, Enrich Reward senior risk advisor Simon Crew says: “It satisfies the needs of clients by providing an offering in line with the rest of the market and, in many cases, in line with the market leaders.”
He points out that the flexibility on the lump sum benefit options combined with limited payment terms allows clients to tailor the policy to meet the needs of employees and businesses.
“The choice of deferred periods is a nice addition to the product as many insurers are rigid in their options. It would be useful to know how the short deferred periods will be handled in terms of claims management,” he says.
Crew also believes the product satisfies advisers by offering a plan which is easy to understand and explain to the clients. “We prefer to work on flat fee so adviser remuneration, while in line with market, is not so important,” he says.
Turning to the potenatial drawbacks of the plan Crew says: “There are few differentiating features from the standard group income protection proposition available in the market. As a new entrant to the market, there needs to be something different to entice clients away from their current provider.”
Crew feels that apart from the deferred period, there is little to make this stand out from the competition, especially if costs are not competitive. He sees competition coming from most of the market, specifically Unum, Canada Life and Legal and General. He believes these providers offer products that are an equal to this product, and have experience on their side.
Suitability to market: Good
Adviser remuneration: Average