• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

April 2019 AS WP

Twinan

Very Active Member
Q2part 7
death claim 60% higher than asset share in with-profit business. More being paid out pn death than maturity and surrender. Likely due to gurantees biting or approach taken to allocate bonus. Example, absolute terminal bonuses maybe same as for maturities of same duration, which are likely to have higher asset shares.

Help me understand this example.
 
Consider:
a 10-year endowment assurance with sum assured of X and premium P1
a 20-year endowment assurance with sum assured of X and premium P2.
P1 could be roughly twice the size of P2 (as the policyholder only pays 10 of them and not 20).
If the policyholder with the 20-year endowment assurance dies after 10 years and receives the same terminal bonus as a 10-year maturity endowment assurance for the same sum assured, they would get more than their asset share because the terminal bonus would be based on the higher premiums.
 
Thanks Em. I’m guessing the example taken above talks about the ‘approach for bonus allocation’.

PH with policy 1 at end of contract (maturity) will have higher asset share as premium paid higher. At maturity, PH gets Y% of X as terminal bonus (ignoring any RBs).

However, if PH with policy 2 dies at same time (10th year) and gets terminal bonus of Y% of X, then first PH is at a disadvantage.

Hence this is how the death claims could be higher than their asset shares if final TB is same as for maturities of the same duration. Where maturities would have higher AS.

Is that correct?
 
Last edited:
Thanks Em. I’m guessing the example taken above talks about the ‘approach for bonus allocation’.

PH with policy 1 at end of contract (maturity) will have higher asset share as premium paid higher. At maturity, PH gets Y% of X as terminal bonus (ignoring any RBs).

However, if PH with policy 2 dies at same time (10th year) and gets terminal bonus of Y% of X, then first PH is at a disadvantage.

Hence this is how the death claims could be higher than their asset shares if final TB is same as for maturities of the same duration. Where maturities would have higher AS.

Is that correct?
Yes
 
Back
Top