Single vs Joint Life Insurance

The key difference between the two is that joint policies usually work on a ‘first death’ basis. Basically, it only pays out once.

The first partner of the two to die triggers a life insurance payout … and the policy then comes to an end.

The surviving partner is no longer insured under that same policy - so they’d have to re-apply if they wish to remain covered.

Thirty years ago, many cohabiting households had one breadwinner and it was standard to only insure that person.

But things are different now. Couples are much more likely to have comparable incomes and contribute equally. The question, then, is whether to go for two singles or one joint policy?

Although the name ‘joint’ suggests it’s tailor made and purpose-built for couples, two single policies is often the more comprehensive way to go.

Joint cover works well if you live together, share the financial responsibilities and want to take out roughly the same level of life cover. It’s usually cheaper than two singles.

If you want to keep costs down and you two share a major financial commitment, like a mortgage, then a joint policy means that one partner’s death can relieve the surviving partner of that overhead.

It’s very possible to take out a combination of single and joint cover. Where there’s a mutual interest (mortgage or children), joint cover may make sense.

But if you and your partner’s circumstances differ in key ways (income level, health, age, financial commitments) then additional single cover could fill those protection gaps.

Remember that a joint policy will only pay out once. If/when that happens, the surviving partner is unprotected. If you or they want to take out single cover at that point (later - when age and health may be significant factors) it’ll be more expensive than buying it now.