# Are BUPA likely to pull out of Ireland ?



## redstar (23 Nov 2006)

Now that the High Court has upheld payments to VHI for Risk Equalisation, will BUPA pull-out or is it just a bluff ?


----------



## kilomike (23 Nov 2006)

They said they would


----------



## half scot (23 Nov 2006)

Can you blame them?So much for competition eh Mr. Ahern...

Even the ruling judge says that risk equalisation is anti-competitive!!!

From Ireland.com


> He acknowledged there was an anti-competitive element to Risk Equalisation but said he scheme was legal under both Irish and European law.


 
I'm with VHI because work pay for it but I'm ashamed to admit it,I'd like to see competition.

Is it just me or is this system a bit strange...

From Ireland.com


> The Health Insurance Authority recommended last year that Bupa make the payments under an internationally recognised system that compensates insurers with older clients because they make higher and more frequent claims.


 
Or am I missing something...??

Half scot


----------



## paddyd (23 Nov 2006)

I think Bupa said thhe amount they woulve to pay to VHI was actually MORE than their yearly profit. Shld be interesting to see how it works out. Pull out, or bite the bullet.


----------



## askalot (23 Nov 2006)

Australia
Belgium
Columbia
Czech Republic
Germany
Israel
Netherland
Russia
Switzerland

9 other countries that operate risk equalisation. BUPA like RE in Australia where they actually receive money through it. Seems like it is a case of a British company using an excuse that is usually used by Irish politicians; "but it's different in Ireland". 

Don't worry; they ain't going anywhere.


----------



## scuby (23 Nov 2006)

they are earning too much to leave, and they did know when they came to ireland that it could and would come in here at some stage....... if it did not come in then it could turn out like car insurance, the more claims you have the dearer it might be, or depending if your are a smooker, heavy drinker etc etc... also the older you get the more you would have to pay.... 
so yes the younger people are kinda subsidising the older, but we are going to get older at some stage and the costs of medical procedures are getting higher and older people may not be able to afford it on their "huge pension"..


----------



## Meathman99 (23 Nov 2006)

Isnt it strange that the government are pushing the "Community Rating" idea for health insurance.   Effectively a fit young sportsperson who doesnt drink or smoke, trains daily, has regular medical/fitness assessments subsidises older smokers drinkers who live on fast food.   How is this fair?


----------



## askalot (24 Nov 2006)

Meathman99 said:


> Isnt it strange that the government are pushing the "Community Rating" idea for health insurance.   Effectively a fit young sportsperson who doesnt drink or smoke, trains daily, has regular medical/fitness assessments subsidises older smokers drinkers who live on fast food.   How is this fair?



Come on.... Surely you understand the word 'community'. 

Just in case :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community

Or maybe you're a closet Rolling Stones fan and hope to die before you get old! 

P.S. Regular fitness assessments are a real waste of money, hope you're paying for them out of your own pocket.


----------



## PGD1 (24 Nov 2006)

right now you are all probable earning money and can afford it... but some day you might be poor and have a major medical bill.

Would you like to be bailed out in this situation?


----------



## F. Kruger (24 Nov 2006)

VHI have 'commissioned' a market research agency, Behaviour & Attitudes, to conduct a research programme among customers who have discontinued their VHI Healtcare membership.

This, despite the fact that they recorded the reason when the plan was cancelled.

I would have thought that the main reason was pretty obvious, but then again when you have a budget to spend money that is not yours, the story is different. What a waste!!!!!!!!


----------



## ajapale (24 Nov 2006)

B&A do both qualitative and quantative research.

When people are asked why they switch service providers they may not respond or they may respond with the easiest answer.

Qualatative research uses focus groups to get at any underlying reasons that might exist.

Personally Im saving myself €300 a year by doing my health insurance with BUPA. I use the €300 for a weekend away each November which contributes to my sense of health and well being.

I considered saving myself a further €20 by moving to VIVAS but inertia set in.

I resent the self serving and nakedly political nature of correspondance I have recieved from Bupa concerning community rating. I also resent the disingenous use of the phrase "rated highly in the community" in their radio advertising.

Some Irish people still have a residual irrational resistance to things British (BT,BA etc).

Quantative research can never hope to pick up on all these nuances in the same way as qualitative research.

I think it is a good thing that companies conduct such research to understand consumer behavioiur better and dont think it is a waste at all. Im sure BUPA and VIVAS conduct similar research.


----------



## Meathman99 (24 Nov 2006)

surely following askalot's and PGD1's thinking we should community rate motor insurance.  Those who can afford car insurance least are charged most.  Based on the fact that they are a higher risk.

What is the difference, apart from the fact that car insurance is compulsory.


----------



## PGD1 (24 Nov 2006)

having a healthy population is seen to be more important than owning a car


what do you mean by those who need it most are charged more?
those who have the highest rates are young males... I dont' see how they need it more than middle aged women, for example.


----------



## askalot (24 Nov 2006)

Meathman99 said:


> surely following askalot's and PGD1's thinking we should community rate motor insurance.  Those who can afford car insurance least are charged most.  Based on the fact that they are a higher risk.
> 
> What is the difference, apart from the fact that car insurance is compulsory.



Eh.... access to healthcare is a right; unlike driving a car. 

In a wealthy society like Ireland this really should be provided by the state but it isn't, so VHI/BUPA/VIVAS pick up the slack for those that can afford it. Fear even pushes those that can't afford it to take out a policy.

Amazing how excited people get defending poor old BUPA who would happily cherry pick the people they insure if they could. 

Though it does express something about the beautiful, caring post-boom New Ireland!


----------



## Meathman99 (24 Nov 2006)

I'm not defending BUPA or VIVAS. I just dont like the idea of people who live what you might call a hedonistic life (smokers, drugg users, heavy drinkers) paying the same premium as people who live a slightly healthier life.  I cant see how anybody can support the idea that everybody regardless of lifestyle pays the same rate.
Surely it would be beneficial for the community on a whole to discourage people from smoking; encourage people to take excercise.  How?  By increase the rate that smokers, heavy drinkers pay; by looking at some way of giving a rebate for gym membership etc.


----------



## gianni (24 Nov 2006)

> will BUPA pull-out or is it just a bluff ?


 
Bluff, bluff, bluff, bluff, bluff....


----------



## jpd (25 Nov 2006)

they will increase their prices and then so will the others!


----------



## murphy05 (25 Nov 2006)

I have VHI for the last 15 years - only had to use it the one time (thankfully). Why should I, or anyone else, be penalised for getting older. I think risk equalisation is fair in the long run. Is BUPAs plan to selectively pick the younger, ill-free person who may not require insurance for many years - PROFIT. As they get older, they may be priced out of proper insurance cover - LOSS.
At least with Risk Equalisation - everyone is treated equally.


----------



## scuby (25 Nov 2006)

in their Australian compay, they receive payments through the risk equalisation process..... slightly hypocritical me thinks


----------



## Glenbhoy (25 Nov 2006)

Meathman99 said:


> I'm not defending BUPA or VIVAS. I just dont like the idea of people who live what you might call a hedonistic life (smokers, drugg users, heavy drinkers) paying the same premium as people who live a slightly healthier life. I cant see how anybody can support the idea that everybody regardless of lifestyle pays the same rate.


And the relevance of this to community rating and risk equalisation in the BUPA decision is?
IMO the govt. are completely within their rights, and as for BUPA leaving, yeah, they will of course - although, given their profitability here is treble that in the UK, they might just give it a little while longer!!


----------



## Gordanus (27 Nov 2006)

Ask BUPA why they do not provide the same benefits in Ireland as they do in Britain and you'll get the "We're a different company over here" answer.   They can't have it both ways.
(They provide adult psychology services in Britain but not here.  Given the kind of disability caused by depression - see other threads - it is nonsense that they won't provide it here.  But they know that the depressed are not likely to protest!)


----------



## rmelly (28 Nov 2006)

Ireland and UK are completely different markets. Do VHI provide adult psychology services?


----------



## Glenbhoy (28 Nov 2006)

Paddypower are betting:
BUPA to be gone by Dec 2007: 5/1
BUPA to still be here by Dec 2007: 1/10


----------



## Brendan Burgess (14 Dec 2006)

Thread continued here


----------

