Let me tell you a story. Yes, Bupa Global is part of it — but this isn’t just about Bupa. It’s a standard practice used by most major insurers. And if you think this doesn’t apply to you because “I’m not planning to change anything” — I suggest reading on.
Scene One: The family with a legacy plan
A couple reached out to me recently. They’d been insured with Bupa Global for years on a legacy product (that’s one of those older plans no longer available to new customers, but renewable for existing ones). The benefits were excellent: outpatient cover of £75k per person, premium service, and plenty of “nice extras” — dental, optical, etc.
BUT. Their renewal quote this year came in at just over £60,000.
Naturally, they wanted to see if they could optimise things. They were offered the current Bupa product range — and to be honest, it looked almost identical. Yes, they’d lose some of the ‘extras’ (which had small limits anyway), and outpatient would drop to £50k per person per year (still a very solid amount). But the price? Nearly £25,000 less. Perfect, right?
Scene Two: The small print and the switch declaration
To move to the new product, Bupa requested a switch declaration. If you’ve never seen one, it’s basically a short medical form where the client confirms they’re not currently undergoing treatment or expecting to need any.
Sounds harmless enough. But here’s the twist: one of the family members had a history of cancer. They were in remission, all stable — but the diagnosis existed.
And if they had signed that declaration, focusing only on the massive price drop and overlooking the fine print — any cancer-related condition would have been excluded going forward.
They called me — thankfully — just in time. We reviewed everything in detail. After some back-and-forth with Bupa (and a few nudges at the right level), I managed to secure an exception: the medical part of the switch declaration was waived. The result?
Seems small? Imagine cancer returns next year, and you find yourself on a plan that doesn’t cover it, all because of a small print no one paid attention to!!!
A different case, same scenario. This time with Cigna.
Just a couple of months ago, another family contacted me with a similar request — reduce the cost by adjusting outpatient limits. They were on Cigna Gold and wanted to downgrade to Silver. Inpatient cover stayed the same, outpatient went down — so did the price. Logical, right?
Cigna offered a new price, but, you guessed it, required a switch declaration.
This family also had a serious diagnosis in the past (again, in remission). We completed the form, and after submission, Cigna came back with their verdict: they were happy to offer the Silver plan, but with new exclusions based on medical history.
We discussed, challenged, pushed… but they stood their ground. New product = new underwriting rules. End off.
In the end, this option was immediately off the table. Why? Because saving £3–4k per year at the expense of potentially tens of thousands in excluded treatments isn’t saving — it’s risk-taking at its worst. The family chose to stay on Gold. A bit pricier, but infinitely safer.
Here’s what you need to understand:
So, what’s the takeaway?
If you’re currently reviewing your policy and thinking “maybe I’ll just update it” — do yourself a favour:
Because we all know: in insurance, the real problems don’t start when you buy a plan — they start when you try to use it. If you want an honest, professional review — no fluff, no slogans — I’m here.
Stay smart. Stay covered.
Scene One: The family with a legacy plan
A couple reached out to me recently. They’d been insured with Bupa Global for years on a legacy product (that’s one of those older plans no longer available to new customers, but renewable for existing ones). The benefits were excellent: outpatient cover of £75k per person, premium service, and plenty of “nice extras” — dental, optical, etc.
BUT. Their renewal quote this year came in at just over £60,000.
Naturally, they wanted to see if they could optimise things. They were offered the current Bupa product range — and to be honest, it looked almost identical. Yes, they’d lose some of the ‘extras’ (which had small limits anyway), and outpatient would drop to £50k per person per year (still a very solid amount). But the price? Nearly £25,000 less. Perfect, right?
Scene Two: The small print and the switch declaration
To move to the new product, Bupa requested a switch declaration. If you’ve never seen one, it’s basically a short medical form where the client confirms they’re not currently undergoing treatment or expecting to need any.
Sounds harmless enough. But here’s the twist: one of the family members had a history of cancer. They were in remission, all stable — but the diagnosis existed.
And if they had signed that declaration, focusing only on the massive price drop and overlooking the fine print — any cancer-related condition would have been excluded going forward.
They called me — thankfully — just in time. We reviewed everything in detail. After some back-and-forth with Bupa (and a few nudges at the right level), I managed to secure an exception: the medical part of the switch declaration was waived. The result?
- The clients switched to the new, cheaper plan, which saved nearly a whopping £25k a year
- Retained full cancer cover
Seems small? Imagine cancer returns next year, and you find yourself on a plan that doesn’t cover it, all because of a small print no one paid attention to!!!
A different case, same scenario. This time with Cigna.
Just a couple of months ago, another family contacted me with a similar request — reduce the cost by adjusting outpatient limits. They were on Cigna Gold and wanted to downgrade to Silver. Inpatient cover stayed the same, outpatient went down — so did the price. Logical, right?
Cigna offered a new price, but, you guessed it, required a switch declaration.
This family also had a serious diagnosis in the past (again, in remission). We completed the form, and after submission, Cigna came back with their verdict: they were happy to offer the Silver plan, but with new exclusions based on medical history.
We discussed, challenged, pushed… but they stood their ground. New product = new underwriting rules. End off.
In the end, this option was immediately off the table. Why? Because saving £3–4k per year at the expense of potentially tens of thousands in excluded treatments isn’t saving — it’s risk-taking at its worst. The family chose to stay on Gold. A bit pricier, but infinitely safer.
Here’s what you need to understand:
- This isn’t Bupa being “cheeky” or Cigna being “greedy”.
- It’s a completely standard approach in private medical insurance. When you switch to a different plan — even with the same insurer — you often may end up with new exclusions. And unless someone negotiates otherwise, you might be in trouble.
- “But I’m only changing outpatient limits, not the insurer!” - Doesn’t matter. To the insurer, technically it’s a new contract, which subsequently means fresh approach to underwriting.
- A broker in this process isn’t a “nice-to-have”. For me it’s essential. Most clients — no matter how smart — don’t tend to know these technical nuances. And more importantly — they can’t access the people inside an insurer who are able to make commercial decisions and override rigid rules when appropriate.
So, what’s the takeaway?
If you’re currently reviewing your policy and thinking “maybe I’ll just update it” — do yourself a favour:
- Speak to a broker before you sign anything
- Before you celebrate a lower price — check what you might be losing (because chances are, you are)
- Before you walk away from a legacy product — understand the real risks
Because we all know: in insurance, the real problems don’t start when you buy a plan — they start when you try to use it. If you want an honest, professional review — no fluff, no slogans — I’m here.
Stay smart. Stay covered.