Why is insurance through Regent not a good idea?

[poss]

With my husband being 90 at the time of our next cruise (if we can mange to take a next cruise) and me being 75, insurance has become almost prohibitively expensive.  Every time I look at what insurance will cost for a particular trip, I say to myself, no way, simply too costly.   Insurance through Regent does not take age into consideration, so presumably costs would be less.   But I remember reading on several occasions that buying insurance through the Regent is not a good idea.   (Well, I guess it's not Regent, it's the company that Regent uses.)   I'm hoping that some of you may be able to suggest why that's the case.

We're about to take off for Barcelona tomorrow, boarding Explorer on May 20.   I might want to book a next cruise on board (the Panama Canal itinerary that I've spoken of in another post), but I may not if I can't find a way to get insurance costs down.    Rallydave had some helpful information on another thread, but this time I'm specifically asking about insurance through Regent.

Many thanks.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

When I looked at it, it was exorbitantly expensive.  I can't remember the percentage, but it was something like 20% of the base cruise cost.

[Travelcat2]

The only problem with insurance through Regent is the cost!  

[wcsdkqh]

Of course, if you are 90, Regent may be your only option.

[poss]

Thanks for the replies.   Ye gads, I thought it was considerably less expensive.     I wonder where I got that notion, but it's obviously incorrect since you both say so.   If I have time, I'll check it out, but I'm sure you're both correct.

 

[pingpong1]

5 minutes ago, poss said:

Thanks for the replies.   Ye gads, I thought it was considerably less expensive.     I wonder where I got that notion, but it's obviously incorrect since you both say so.   If I have time, I'll check it out, but I'm sure you're both correct.

 

Hi Poss - When my Dad was still alive and cruising with us, he was in his early 90's.  I found (and thought) that the Regent-offered cruise insurance for him was quite reasonably priced and the best deal.  The premium for him was based solely upon a percentage of the cruise fare paid.  And I believe that percentage was 10%.  Now, since he was the 3rd person in our room (Dad slept on the "pull out" sofa) his fare, as the 3rd person, was much less than ours was.  But at his age, the alternative insurance premium cost (if it were based upon age, as most are) would have been either prohibitive or unobtainable.  Look at Regent's premium structure again.  You might see, after comparing it to other products, it's not really a bad deal at all compared to the other options.  That might not be the case for younger travelers.  Regards.

[kaleighsgram]

Just something to keep in mind... Make sure the insurance would cover pre-existing conditions, if this is something you need. Some companies give you a time frame, that is  you have so many days from the time of reserving your cabin to the time of purchasing the insurance. I know we had thirty days from the time of reservation. 

[1985rz1]

A long time ago I was advised against taking insurance offered by the tour operator that one is using, not because of cost, but because if the tour operator goes under, so does the insurance.  I don't know if that still holds, but it's probably dependent on the underwriter.

Edited May 15, 2019 by 1985rz1

[poss]

I appreciate the continued input.   And pingpong, what you say was what I remember.   It will be interesting and important to check this out.  Btw, I hadn't realized that a third person's fee was less than the others.

[pingpong1]

2 hours ago, poss said:

I appreciate the continued input.   And pingpong, what you say was what I remember.   It will be interesting and important to check this out.  Btw, I hadn't realized that a third person's fee was less than the others.

Poss - The (financial) way I thought of it was that DW and I were actually paying for "the full stateroom" and infrastructure costs, and Dad's small additional fare was going towards the additional food and beverages that he was consuming.  And even up into his 90's (as an "old retired Navy Man"), Dad could still ably hold up his end of a good bottle of single-malt scotch! The pull-out sofa in the stateroom would have been there anyway, if it had just been the 2 of us, so we felt that the small additional fare being charged by Regent (for Dad) was quite reasonable (and appreciated).  On an additional note, Mark Conroy - a true gentleman - personally arranged for that room to be made available for us on very short notice.  I still think fondly of Mark and appreciated that kindness very much.  Best Regards.

[papaflamingo]

15 hours ago, Wendy The Wanderer said:

When I looked at it, it was exorbitantly expensive.  I can't remember the percentage, but it was something like 20% of the base cruise cost.

Not absolutely positive of this, but I believe that Regent's Travel Protection Plan is around 8% of the cost of the cruise.  

We did 44 nights last year.  Due to the cost of the cruise, it was hard to find a plan that would cover it.   I finally  found one through Berkshire Hathaway Travel Protection for significantly less premium and better coverage.  I'm 67 years old and my wife is 66 so that is a definite factor.  It might be that Regent's plan for a 90 year old will be the cheapest.  

Edited May 16, 2019 by papaflamingo

[Wendy The Wanderer]

15 hours ago, poss said:

Thanks for the replies.   Ye gads, I thought it was considerably less expensive.     I wonder where I got that notion, but it's obviously incorrect since you both say so.   If I have time, I'll check it out, but I'm sure you're both correct.

 

 

Poss, you'll just have to get a quote  for Regent Care if you're thinking of booking, and remember that to get pre-existing coverage, you need to pay upfront almost immediately after booking, so you need to get your ducks in a row first.

 

If so, let us know what the percentage is, I'd like to know, since my research at the time of my WC booking was as I stated, and if I'm wrong, I'd like to know.

Edited May 16, 2019 by Wendy The Wanderer

[poss]

Thanks once more, and I will for sure post on CC when I learn more details.   Off to Miami in an hour or so for flight to Barcelona.

[Ladys Mom]

Poss: Look forward to meeting you and your husband on the Explorer.  We are leaving Saturday afternoon and will be staying at the Hotel Sofia Barcelona Sunday night.  We found reasonably priced insurance for our 2021 World Cruise, but it was age-dependent through Berkshire Hathaway.  One other possibility that I found out about on another thread yesterday, is the Chase Sapphire Premium (?) I'm not sure of the exact card.  It includes trip cancellation/interruption insurance up to $10,000 each person.  Good luck on your insurance quest.  I hope we make it to 90 and can still travel.  You are a very lucky couple.

[rallydave]

22 hours ago, 1985rz1 said:

A long time ago I was advised against taking insurance offered by the tour operator that one is using, not because of cost, but because if the tour operator goes under, so does the insurance.  I don't know if that still holds, but it's probably dependent on the underwriter.

This is absolutely true.  Never purchase insurance from the company you are buying something from.  Believe others were talking about this Regent insurance being from an insurance company.  Not completely sure but, believe that you are paying insurance to Regent who is "self-insuring" and thus is letting the fox into the chicken coop and a very bad idea.

 

Also, don't believe there is any possibility of pre-existing coverage as this insurance is a one size fits all so poss will not be able to cover pre-existing issues.  If one has to have insurance and is of an older age, not withstanding the no preexisting coverage and the buying directly from Regent, have to do your homework and might just be less expensive enough from any other available insurance for that age and if you can stand the other issues might be the way to go in a few cases.

 

Like picking an insurance carrier, each person has to do their own calculations and decide with the results.  Good luck poss!!

[Wendy The Wanderer]

28 minutes ago, rallydave said:

This is absolutely true.  Never purchase insurance from the company you are buying something from.  Believe others were talking about this Regent insurance being from an insurance company.  Not completely sure but, believe that you are paying insurance to Regent who is "self-insuring" and thus is letting the fox into the chicken coop and a very bad idea.

 

Also, don't believe there is any possibility of pre-existing coverage as this insurance is a one size fits all so poss will not be able to cover pre-existing issues.  If one has to have insurance and is of an older age, not withstanding the no preexisting coverage and the buying directly from Regent, have to do your homework and might just be less expensive enough from any other available insurance for that age and if you can stand the other issues might be the way to go in a few cases.

 

Like picking an insurance carrier, each person has to do their own calculations and decide with the results.  Good luck poss!!

 

I believe you *can* get pre-existing coverage if you buy Regent Care insurance and pay for it in full immediately on booking.  There may be an upper age limit, I can't remember.  I thought about doing that for our world cruise, but I didn't have my ducks in a row well enough to do it within the 10 day post-booking limit.  And it is exorbitant, whatever the percentage is.

 

Viking, on the other hand, allows you to buy insurance (up front), with pre-existing, and it's something like 8%, which is pretty good.  You do have to pay for it right away, but apparently you get medical visits onboard included in the price.  That almost swayed us to switch our WC to Viking, but not quite.

[MadMarine]

Wendy, one of the reasons we jumped to Viking WC next year.  The price was a factor, but mostly, the itinerary.  More bucket list check offs!

[pingpong1]

According to the "fine print" (T&C's) on Regent's website, the "RegentCare Travel Protection Program" is underwritten by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company of Columbus, Ohio. I don't think there's much of chance of Nationwide "going under" anytime soon.  Apparently, Regent is not a "self-insurer" for their travel protection program.  You can get to the info by dropping to the FAQ section at the very bottom of Regent's homepage and then "clicking on" the section for RegentCare Insurance.

 

You then have to specify your state of resident (maybe it's not available for non-U.S residents?).  It will then take you to the specific policy and coverage that would apply to you - under the laws of your home state.  Like any Insurance policy, you'll see multiple pages of "definitions" and "exclusions".  Some might say, "loop holes", that would absolve them from "paying up" for any claim.  I didn't read the whole thing but "Exclusion #1" was "pre-existing conditions".

 

I also noted this RegentCare insurance will not be the "first payee" for any claims if you have any other insurance that would provide coverage (like a Chase Sapphire Reserve Card, etc.).   RegentCare would only pick up the "difference" (up the limit of their coverage) after any/all other payees possible/conceivable payees you might have "kicked in" first.  I would advise anyone to read the tiny details carefully before handing over any money for any travel insurance policy - from any company.  As they say, "the devil's in the details".  Best Regards

[Travelcat2]

3 hours ago, rallydave said:

This is absolutely true.  Never purchase insurance from the company you are buying something from.  Believe others were talking about this Regent insurance being from an insurance company.  Not completely sure but, believe that you are paying insurance to Regent who is "self-insuring" and thus is letting the fox into the chicken coop and a very bad idea.

 

Also, don't believe there is any possibility of pre-existing coverage as this insurance is a one size fits all so poss will not be able to cover pre-existing issues.  If one has to have insurance and is of an older age, not withstanding the no preexisting coverage and the buying directly from Regent, have to do your homework and might just be less expensive enough from any other available insurance for that age and if you can stand the other issues might be the way to go in a few cases.

 

Like picking an insurance carrier, each person has to do their own calculations and decide with the results.  Good luck poss!!

 

Not true!  Regent does not self-insure (as stated above and in in Regent T&C's!) so Regent is not letting any foxes into the chicken coop.  

 

poss - strongly suggest that you double check any information provided on this thread.  Your best bet is to get information from the insurance/credit card carriers as they will understand a lot more about your individual situation.

 

Agree, it is difficult/expensive to insure a 90 year old but it is doable.  Also, some Medi-Gap policies cover out of the country medical (up to a specified limit - our policy has that).  And, if you have medical insurance, you only need evacuation insurance which is much less expensive and, yes, if you look hard enough, you can find it for your DH.

 

Lady's Mom - the card you are referring to is "Chase Sapphire Reserve" and it does have the insurance that you referred to (but check details).  

Edited May 17, 2019 by Travelcat2

[1985rz1]

1 hour ago, pingpong1 said:

According to the "fine print" (T&C's) on Regent's website, the "RegentCare Travel Protection Program" is underwritten by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company of Columbus, Ohio. I don't think there's much of chance of Nationwide "going under" anytime soon.  Apparently, Regent is not a "self-insurer" for their travel protection program.  You can get to the info by dropping to the FAQ section at the very bottom of Regent's homepage and then "clicking on" the section for RegentCare Insurance.

 

You then have to specify your state of resident (maybe it's not available for non-U.S residents?).  It will then take you to the specific policy and coverage that would apply to you - under the laws of your home state.  Like any Insurance policy, you'll see multiple pages of "definitions" and "exclusions".  Some might say, "loop holes", that would absolve them from "paying up" for any claim.  I didn't read the whole thing but "Exclusion #1" was "pre-existing conditions".

 

I also noted this RegentCare insurance will not be the "first payee" for any claims if you have any other insurance that would provide coverage (like a Chase Sapphire Reserve Card, etc.).   RegentCare would only pick up the "difference" (up the limit of their coverage) after any/all other payees possible/conceivable payees you might have "kicked in" first.  I would advise anyone to read the tiny details carefully before handing over any money for any travel insurance policy - from any company.  As they say, "the devil's in the details".  Best Regards

That means the insurance is secondary, not primary.  For folks on any other insurance plan, that plan pays first.  That's more of an annoyance for filing than for anything else...except for US Medicare Supplement plans, where there is a maximum lifetime limit.  But mainly it seems to be a pay first then get reimbursed annoyance issue.

[hypercafe]

Another point is the Regent coverage for medical care is small, I believe 10k and 50k for evacuation. In today's world and onboard the ship this doesn't go far. 

[Wendy The Wanderer]

16 hours ago, MadMarine said:

Wendy, one of the reasons we jumped to Viking WC next year.  The price was a factor, but mostly, the itinerary.  More bucket list check offs!

 

Yeah, we thought long and hard about this for 2021.  I would have sprung, but David wasn't willing to risk doing a WC on a line we hadn't been on, and we didn't want to do a shorty with them.  Plus, they lack some perks that Regent has, like a much fuller alcohol inclusion, included laundry and dry cleaning, and of course the excursions--the one included at each port by Viking seems often pretty lame.  They only ship luggage one-way, for some strange reason.  And although I would prefer to do my own excursions, doing so on a world cruise would be daunting, especially in places where you'd have to arrange to share with other pax--this works well on Oceania but I'm not sure it works on Viking. 

 

And to get a cabin that's about the same size as a Mariner G, the price for a minimal PH is about the same as our Regent G, sans extensive excursion options.

 

Other than that, it sounds great, really.  Love the look of their ships, the layout and public spaces.  And I think the food would be fine, albeit perhaps not as glitzy as Regent tries to be.  

 

And as for itinerary, you get to love what you've chosen to do, right? Six of one, half a dozen of another.  

[MadMarine]

6 minutes ago, Wendy The Wanderer said:

 

Yeah, we thought long and hard about this for 2021.  I would have sprung, but David wasn't willing to risk doing a WC on a line we hadn't been on, and we didn't want to do a shorty with them.  Plus, they lack some perks that Regent has, like a much fuller alcohol inclusion, included laundry and dry cleaning, and of course the excursions--the one included at each port by Viking seems often pretty lame.  They only ship luggage one-way, for some strange reason.  And although I would prefer to do my own excursions, doing so on a world cruise would be daunting, especially in places where you'd have to arrange to share with other pax--this works well on Oceania but I'm not sure it works on Viking. 

 

And to get a cabin that's about the same size as a Mariner G, the price for a minimal PH is about the same as our Regent G, sans extensive excursion options.

 

Other than that, it sounds great, really.  Love the look of their ships, the layout and public spaces.  And I think the food would be fine, albeit perhaps not as glitzy as Regent tries to be.  

 

And as for itinerary, you get to love what you've chosen to do, right? Six of one, half a dozen of another.  

Wendy,

I hear ya about the potential downside to the Viking WC. We’ve not been on a Viking cruise, so some risk there.  I also found the one way luggage shipment odd as well.  We are pretty easy going as far as excursions are concerned.  We’ve been on crappy, excellent and otherwise on all the cruises we’ve been on including paid Regent excursions.  Usually, for us, an overview tour is just fine.  There are exceptions, of course, the Vatican comes to mind!  Almost missed the Pieta 😳.  

As you say, the itinerary becomes a very personal choice.  We are missing the first two weeks on Viking because of duplication of previous cruises.  The remainder will mostly be places we’ve not been.  

[Travelcat2]

6 hours ago, hypercafe said:

Another point is the Regent coverage for medical care is small, I believe 10k and 50k for evacuation. In today's world and onboard the ship this doesn't go far. 

 

You are likely correct about Regent's coverage, however, I should have been more clear about my recommendation which is not to use Regent for evacuation insurance due to the cost (evacuation insurance is generally much less money than insurance for cancelling a cruise for any reason.   This thread's subject is a phrased funnily.  Not sure why people want to know why they shouldn't purchase Regent's insurance.  To me it makes more sense to ask for which companies are the best for elderly adults in the U.S.  

 

Once there are recommendations, you can check out the companies that are referred and see which one works best for you.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

47 minutes ago, MadMarine said:

Wendy,

I hear ya about the potential downside to the Viking WC. We’ve not been on a Viking cruise, so some risk there.  I also found the one way luggage shipment odd as well.  We are pretty easy going as far as excursions are concerned.  We’ve been on crappy, excellent and otherwise on all the cruises we’ve been on including paid Regent excursions.  Usually, for us, an overview tour is just fine.  There are exceptions, of course, the Vatican comes to mind!  Almost missed the Pieta 😳.  

As you say, the itinerary becomes a very personal choice.  We are missing the first two weeks on Viking because of duplication of previous cruises.  The remainder will mostly be places we’ve not been.  

 

Yeah, I agree about the hit or miss excursions.  We will be taking a lazy approach, since we'll be 73 and 78 by that time.  And the odd private tour, especially in the east where they can be quite cheap in places.  

 

The first two weeks of our WC is also an almost exact duplicate of a cruise we already took, but we're looking forward to doing it again, catching things we missed, and going back to favourite places.  Wouldn't miss that time on Mariner.  And I think if we tried to book just Lima - Barcelona, it wouldn't be a WC any more in Regent's eyes and we'd lose all kinds of perks.

 

I see that the part you're missing is that long Pacific crossing to Papeete.  There's definitely an argument for missing that. 

Edited May 17, 2019 by Wendy The Wanderer