Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Original poster

What would you do?

17 replies

whostolemyname · 13/03/2012 15:47

Offered either a £3000 (about 8%) a year pay rise, OR BUPA for whole family?

Which would you go for and why?

OP posts:
Roseformeplease · 13/03/2012 15:56

Take the money. But then I live hundreds of miles from a BUPA hospital and the NHS here is brilliant.

Original poster
whostolemyname · 13/03/2012 16:44

Ok so its one for the money, thanks Rose .... any more views?

OP posts:
NickNacks · 13/03/2012 16:46

Money!

Thetokengirl · 13/03/2012 16:47

Take the money. Put it into a savings account (savings rates supposed to be on the up). Then, if you ever need medical care you have the option of a) Using the NHS which is often best for serious illnesses anyway or b) Using the savings you have accrued.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 13/03/2012 16:47

Money for me. NHS is free, BUPA would be taxed as a perk and, if you don't use it, it's not a lot of use. If you really wanted BUPA for the average family I don't think it would cost £3000/year. Use the money to buy everyone vitamin pills and flu shots :)

AgentProvocateur · 13/03/2012 16:49

I'd take the money too. In the 16 years since I've had children, my only hospital experiences have been one emergency admission (me) and three visits to A&E (DC) for stitches, broken bones etc - none of which would have been any different/quicker if we'd had BUPA. DH hasn't been near a medical professional for about 20 years.

But if you or your DC have medical conditions then go for BUPA (but check pre-existing conditions are covered).

I presume you are in the UK....

Original poster
whostolemyname · 13/03/2012 17:58

Thanks everyone. Yes in the UK so have access to NHS care. I have had cancer in the past so doubt i would be covered for that (though waiting to find out about finer details of the cover. I think you are all right, it would be better to go for the money.

Would anyone go for the BUPA?

OP posts:
Chippychop · 13/03/2012 20:16

Money money money.... Gives you choice

Original poster
whostolemyname · 14/03/2012 13:29

bump! Appreciate thoughts so far ... any more?

OP posts:
CogitoErgoSometimes · 14/03/2012 14:50

Think you've had the majority view. :)

hoops997 · 14/03/2012 21:35

Another vote for the money Grin

wizzler · 14/03/2012 21:36

Money!.. options now, and presumably it will enhance your pension?

fivegomadindorset · 14/03/2012 21:37

I have a friend who is currently undergoing treatment for leukaemia under her husband's BUPA cover, but you would need to find out whether you will be covered. If you are I would go for the BUPA cover.

Glenshee · 14/03/2012 22:27

Money!

applecrumbleandcream · 16/03/2012 22:12

Money definitely. My sister has BUPA as a benefit with her job and has had two operations on her shoulder both in private hospitals. Neither have been a success....now she's going back to the NHS.

Becaroooo · 17/03/2012 08:33

Money.

BUPA is crap - so much you cant claim for! (and taxable)

justwishes · 17/03/2012 08:38

Money - then take BUPA cover yourself if you really want it :)

New posts on this thread. Refresh page