I would just like to ask a few question Why does Anita need to have a life assurance only for the value of the house. If she is dead she is gone and has no dependants so why does she need to cover herself. I feel the other way around She should cover herself for a total disability benifit rather than the life cover. The other issue which I have seen with all these wealth managers is they feel that if you are young and do not have dependants you do not need to cover yourself. Well Life insurance is a privelege and not a right What makes them feel that they would be medically fit to be accepted by a insurance company at a later date. There are a whole lot of whole of life unit linked life insurances in the market and everyone should cover themselves. At a younger age the cost is lower and the obligations and liabilities and responsibilities lower as when one gets older married and then Children. Regards Shaheed
