Thanks for the full answer. That does seem the most likely stance for the insurers to take (as you say, why would they take the risk?). I was just a bit puzzled as that is not made clear in their blurb.

Yes, I am in danger of being made redundant but everything I have read on the policy info suggests that they won't insure you if you KNOW you are being made redundant, not that you know you are in danger of being made redundant. There is a big difference and I am surprised that they are not specific on that point.

Anyway, that is pretty much what I expected to be the case so many thanks for clarifying. Fingers crossed I will still have a job!

No insurer will take the case on. The fact that notice has been given by your company of potential redundancies means that you are at risk of redundancy and therefore uninsurable on a policy for this reason.

A stupid question, but why are you suddenly looking for unemployment cover if you are in no danger of being made redundant. The simple answer is that you are in danger and you want to cover yourself and the insurers will not want to cover this risk, even if it is a 1 in 10 chance of it happening. You wouldn't jump out of a plane with a parachute that has a 1 in 10 chance of not opening.

I think that if you read the policies a little closer you will see that if any notice has been given by the company of redundancies that could affect your position of employment then the insurer will decline to take the risk on. They do not need to state the odds of that risk, they can just decline to take the risk on full stop. The insurance is not your right, it is a service that the provider is offering and they can withdraw that right if they feel the risk and balance is not in their favour.

You will also find that unless you have a similar policy in place already that you would have a "lie in" period of upto 180 days (some providers are only 90 days) where by you could not make any kind of a claim for loss of employment. These periods are designed specifically to combat the risk of potential redundancy.

You can take your chances with a policy but i think you may find the insurer would decline the claim in the event that you lose your job and this would only end up as a waste of your time, effort and premiums paid

Ok thanks, I thought it would be more cut and dried from the lack of definitive wording that I have seen so far that they would have to take my business. If no one can clarify that then I guess I will not know for sure.

I certainly am not going to speak to them or any financial shysters without knowing the facts first!

Thanks for your help though.

This is a forum, not a place for decisions. I can't tell you what the Insurers would do in the event that you tried to claim.

The only way you will find out, is by speaking to companies or financial advisors that offer these policies.

This has been discussed before on forums and I am led to believe that if ANY redundancies have been announced or even discussed within the workplace, that Insurers have been known to refuse claims.

What I meant was, that all the policies I have looked at have the same standard wording and it suggests that it is the individual they are talking about (not surprisingly as it is only the individual they are interested in). Wording to say " you may be aware of rumours" wouldn't stand up in court, and I wonder if it is the same case for my situation? How could they penalise someone for knowing that they "may be made redundant"? They would surely have to state odds that they would accept: 200 redundancies out of a workforce of 2000 is acceptable or it isn't? I appreciate the onus would be on the individual to prove when they became aware that their name is on the list, but if they don't cover it that specifically in their key facts docs then surely they don't have a leg to stand on?

Thanks but as this "small print" is ambiguous, but the inference is that the individual doesn't know they are going to be made redundant, (which I don't) then it sounds like I could take out cover.

Don't think there are any policies which will cover such situations, even if there was just a rumour and not even an annoucement.

BUT, you should check with a local Independent Financial Advisor to see if they are aware of any products that might be available to cater for your needs.

Most of the "Key Facts" docs I have looked at for Income insurance in case of redundancy state that you must not have been notified of redundancy when applying for the policy. Fair enough. However what is the situation when your firm has announced that there will be redundancies but has not named names yet. In other words I may or may not be one of the unlucky 200 redundancies announced?

Can I still apply and be covered, if I end up being one of the redundancies? Advice needed asap!