Immigrationboards.com

Hi,
Can anyone throw the light on comprehensive medical insurance as should it cover 100% outpatient too as because no medical insurance company can give 100% outpatient cover. Every company exclude pre-existing conditions and give a certain benefit limit on outpatient cover (e.g £1000/£1500). Please advise me that does this ukba also understand this fact and accept it.
Regards

sheraz7 wrote:Hi,
Can anyone throw the light on comprehensive medical insurance as should it cover 100% outpatient too as because no medical insurance company can give 100% outpatient cover. Every company exclude pre-existing conditions and give a certain benefit limit on outpatient cover (e.g £1000/£1500). Please advise me that does this ukba also understand this fact and accept it.
Regards

This is a long running issue, and if you read the news, the European Commission is to take the UKBA to court over it. The requirement is completely pointless, because there is no market for comprehensive medical insurance in the UK. The NHS covers pretty much everybody, and private insurance is always just a top up.

Now you could fight this, but it would be a difficult route. If you want to take the easy way, I would look for a policy that does include outpatient cover. Never mind the limit, the UKBA is supposedly reasonable when deciding whether the policy is sufficient.

many thanks for your reply.
you mean that if the inpatient is 100% cover which almost every company promise but if the outpatient have certain benefits limits then it should be fine for ukba.
regards.

sheraz7 wrote:you mean that if the inpatient is 100% cover which almost every company promise but if the outpatient have certain benefits limits then it should be fine for ukba.

Yes, that is my interpretation. Just go for one of the better policies, and it should be ok.

Ok. But how about the pre-existing conditions that no medical insurance company ever agree to cover unless after completing 24 months period.

It does not matter.

So outpatient treatments are appearantly necessary, but would it matter if a private health insurance policy has the minimum levels of outpatient treatments (i don't mean benefit limits on outpatient treatments)?

For instance, when checking online quotes:


WPA:
I can choose 3 different types:
"essential" = ~20 pound monthly per person
covered outpatient treatments:
Pre-admission tests
Pre-op consultation - £150
Post-op consultation
Post-op physiotherapy - £200

"premier" = ~40 Pound monthly per person
covered outpatient treatments:
Pre-admission tests
Post-op consultation and tests
Physiotherapy & other therapies - £200
Specialist consultations and tests - £150
Diagnostic scans
Out-patient procedures

"elite" = ~85 Pound monthly per person
covered outpatient treatments:
Pre-admission tests
Post-op consultation and tests
Physiotherapy & other therapies
Specialist consultations and tests
Diagnostic scans


bupa:
When checking BUPA's "comprehensive policy" quote (with minimum amount of extra's selected but stating that outpatient treatments are paid "in full") the minimum price is around 55 Pound per person per month (with maximum extra's up to ~95 Pound per month pp).

axa:
Axa is ~25 Pound pm pp, when selecting minimum extra's (by tweaking).
covered outpatient treaments:
Surgical procedures.
Cancer treatment including radiotherapy and chemotherapy.
Computerised tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission
tomography (PET) in a scanning centre listed in the Directory of Hospitals.

aviva:
(At the moment Aviva doesnt give quotes so I couldnt check them.)


Which of these policies would be most likely considered satisfactory by the UKBA?
(Does the fact that BUPA has a policy with the word "comprehensive" in its name make it a better choice?)