Is this harsh.....

im 50/50 on this to be truthfull
 
Would it be wrong to take out life insurance on a relative yourself?
 
I.E. you pay the monthly payments for them in exchange for the end result.
 
 

Tricky one tbh, Id say go for it tbh, i know if a close relative dies then money isnt the answer but may well be useful.

Why what are you planning?

Basically, my mum has never had money to her name. Part of me thinks, if she did, she wouldve done the above suggestion herself, but as she has no kids she hasnt done.

But then part of me thinks it sounds like im wanting her to die to gain some cash, which isnt the case at all.

Its so hard to phrase without sounding wrong!!!

You could always offer to pay for one but not be named - if you have siblings you could leave it up to them. Then it genuinely would be an altruistic act

you could do I suppose... have you actually spoken to your mum about it yet?

And of course, you'd be presuming she'd leave it you, rather than the cat's home, unless you discuss it with her.

nooo I havent spoken to her about it lol, tbh it was hard enough phrasing it to put on here, let alone approach her with my stuttering hahaha.

tbh though, i dont think she would have an issue with the idea whatsoever, maybe im the one creating an issue out of it.

You can't do it. Its not legal.

The only way you could do it would be via your mum, in her name, payments made via her etc, with you named as the beneficiary.

You yourself cannot take out a policy on your mum's life.

it hasn't been brought up yet and you were asking about it. Classic.

Have there been loads of reruns of Columbo recently ?

Well if she knows that you are doing it it should be fine, im sure that your mum wants the best for you.

In the US its quite common for large corporate bodies to take out Life Insurance on their employees and name themselves as the beneficiary, so if the employee dies they get a big payout.

Some companies may give a share of this to the family, most dont.

Its known in the S insurance trade as 'Dead Peasants In surance'

Nice, huh?

tac


In the US its quite common for large corporate bodies to take out Life Insurance on their employees and name themselves as the beneficiary, so if the employee dies they get a big payout.

Some companies may give a share of this to the family, most dont.

Its known in the S insurance trade as 'Dead Peasants In surance'

Nice, huh?

And in the UK its called 'Key Man' insurance and is designed to cover the costs of locating and recruiting replacement key staff.

I was just going to say that Total as I had to have Key Man insurance to cover me when I had my business, interestingly the other employees did not (said a lot about my skills) - I would personally say its not ethical but its a bit like a sure bet, seems wrong to me!

Total Rebuild

tac


In the US its quite common for large corporate bodies to take out Life Insurance on their employees and name themselves as the beneficiary, so if the employee dies they get a big payout.

Some companies may give a share of this to the family, most dont.

Its known in the S insurance trade as 'Dead Peasants In surance'

Nice, huh?

And in the UK its called 'Key Man' insurance and is designed to cover the costs of locating and recruiting replacement key staff.

'Key Man' insurance is quite different, in that its designed to cover legitimate business costs incurred if senior staff are lost. DPI gets taken out on janitors, secretarial staff, filing clerks etc, and is usually waaaay in excess of any possible costs incurred in staff replacement ($1.5m to recruit a new janitor?...)

peagreen


I was just going to say that Total as I had to have Key Man insurance to cover me when I had my business, interestingly the other employees did not (said a lot about my skills) - I would personally say its not ethical but its a bit like a sure bet, seems wrong to me!

Not if its used correctly Peagreen. Imagine when you had your business you needed another bod you could trust, knew as much about your field as you did, you invested time and money training them etc. Then one day something happened to them and they couldn't go on working for you. This could leave you in a right situation and you would need to replace that person, with someone of a similar calibre asap. This could be very expensive, as the person would likely have to be lured away form their current employment, there would likely be agent fees etc. This is what the cover is intended for.  

I meant to the OP Total - not about the Key Man insurance, I fully understood what that is about.  The bit I never really understood with key man insurance, even if you do lose an employee to horrible circumstances, you may have a hard time replacing the employee anyway. 

After the MD and I fell out in style I left giving them six months notice, it took them nine to replace me and another two before the bloke finally walked through the door, so nearly five months from the day I left!  I'm not sure whether key man insurance would cover the loss of business, does it?

Not sure Peagreen as I'ts not an insurance I deal with. I just know a bit about it from exams I've taken in the past.

Yes Tac, this 'DPI' does sound like something very different indeed and I'm pretty sure wouldn't be legal in UK/Europe. However in the US, what Corporate America wants, Corporate America gets.

S777


Basically, my mum has never had money to her name. Part of me thinks, if she did, she wouldve done the above suggestion herself, but as she has no kids she hasnt done.

But then part of me thinks it sounds like im wanting her to die to gain some cash, which isnt the case at all.

Its so hard to phrase without sounding wrong!!!

Erm...am i missing something here or..?

All4n

S777


Basically, my mum has never had money to her name. Part of me thinks, if she did, she wouldve done the above suggestion herself, but as she has no kids she hasnt done.

But then part of me thinks it sounds like im wanting her to die to gain some cash, which isnt the case at all.

Its so hard to phrase without sounding wrong!!!

Erm...am i missing something here or..?

lol! I didnt notice that...


Back on topic - OP - I dont see what the problem is provided you tell her you're doing it, and she has some say in where the payout goes.

In that case you're simply paying her Life Insurance premiums for her, which is a good thing  (as opposed to if you do it behind her back, with yourself as the only beneficiary then it might sound like you're cashing in on her death!)

All4n

S777


Basically, my mum has never had money to her name. Part of me thinks, if she did, she wouldve done the above suggestion herself, but as she has no kids she hasnt done.

 

I thought the same.

What age is she? is she ill and expected to pass on in the next 5 years?

Even though i know my mother would like to assist me financially later in life and would be open to that sort of thing i could never do it. It just wouldnt feel right to me personally i think. Though then again its very easy for me to say that as i know i will be getting a large inheritance when my parents pass away.

Morally i dont think there is anything wrong with it and if you think that she would be open to it then go for it. How you would bring it up though i have no idea lol