Protection questions in R06 should be among the easiest marks on the paper. The products are well-defined, the client needs are usually clear from the case study, and the answer structure is predictable. Yet examiner reports consistently highlight protection as an area where candidates underperform.
The problem is almost always the same: candidates either recommend the wrong product, fail to justify why it's suitable, or give such generic advice that the examiner can't award marks. Here's a framework that fixes all three issues.
Step 1: Identify the risk before recommending a product
Before you write down a product name, identify the specific risk the client faces. Protection products exist to cover financial risks, so start with the risk, not the product.
The main risks to look for in a case study:
- Death, who depends on the client's income? Is there a mortgage that needs repaying? Are there children who need financial support?
- Critical illness, could the client's household survive financially if they were diagnosed with a serious condition? Would they need to stop working?
- Long-term incapacity, what happens if the client can't work for an extended period? How long would their employer continue to pay them?
- Loss of income, what's the gap between what the client currently earns and what they'd receive from state benefits and employer sick pay?
Each risk maps to a specific product. If you get the risk identification right, the product recommendation follows naturally.
Step 2: Match the risk to the right product
This is where candidates most commonly lose marks. The examiner reports repeatedly highlight confusion between protection products. Here's the distinction:
Life cover (term assurance)
Covers: Death within a specified term.
When to recommend: The client has dependants who rely on their income, or there's a mortgage or other debt that needs repaying on death.
Key variants:
- Level term, fixed sum assured, suitable for interest-only mortgages or general family protection
- Decreasing term, sum assured reduces over time, suitable for repayment mortgages
- Family income benefit, pays a regular income rather than a lump sum, often more cost-effective for young families
Common mistake: Recommending life cover when the question is about incapacity. Life cover only pays out on death (or terminal illness). If the client is worried about being unable to work, life cover is the wrong product.
Critical illness cover
Covers: Diagnosis of a specified serious illness (e.g. cancer, heart attack, stroke).
When to recommend: The client wants a lump sum to cover costs associated with a serious diagnosis, mortgage repayment, home adaptations, private treatment, or simply to provide financial security during recovery.
Key features:
- Pays a one-off lump sum on diagnosis
- Can be standalone or added to a life policy
- Does not cover all illnesses, only those listed in the policy
- Does not provide ongoing income
Common mistake: Recommending critical illness cover as an alternative to income protection. They serve different purposes. CI provides a lump sum for a specific event; it doesn't replace lost income on an ongoing basis.
Income protection
Covers: Loss of income due to illness or injury that prevents the client from working.
When to recommend: The client has limited employer sick pay, relies heavily on earned income, and would face financial difficulty if unable to work for an extended period.
Key features:
- Pays a regular income (typically up to 50-65% of pre-incapacity earnings)
- Can be short-term (1-2 years) or long-term (to retirement)
- Has a deferred period (typically 4, 8, 13, or 26 weeks) during which no benefit is paid
- Premiums can be reviewable or guaranteed
Common mistake: Failing to match the deferred period to the client's sick pay entitlement. If the employer pays full salary for six months, the deferred period should be set at 26 weeks to avoid paying for cover the client doesn't need.
Step 3: Justify the recommendation using case study facts
This is where the real marks are. The examiner doesn't just want to know what you're recommending. They want to know why, and specifically why for this client.
A weak answer:
"The client should consider income protection."
A strong answer:
"Priya currently has no income protection in place and her employer only provides statutory sick pay. As the higher earner in the household with a net monthly income of £3,200 and fixed monthly outgoings of £2,500, any period of incapacity would leave the family unable to meet essential expenses. A long-term income protection policy with a 4-week deferred period, paying approximately 50% of her gross salary, would provide a regular income until she returns to work or reaches retirement age."
The second answer references the client's name, their income, their employer's sick pay provision, their household expenses, and the specific terms of the recommended policy. That's what scores marks.
Step 4: Consider the extras that score additional marks
Once you've covered the core recommendation, there are several additional points that can pick up extra marks:
-
Writing policies in trust. This ensures the death benefit is paid outside the estate and doesn't form part of the IHT calculation. It also speeds up the claims process. If the question involves life cover and there's any IHT angle in the case study, mention trusts.
-
Joint vs single life policies, if the case study involves a couple, consider whether a joint-life first-death policy or two single-life policies would be more appropriate. Single-life policies provide flexibility (each partner retains their own cover if the relationship ends) but are more expensive.
-
Indexation, recommend index-linked cover if the client is young or the policy term is long. This ensures the sum assured keeps pace with inflation.
-
Relevant life policies, if the client is a company director or employer, a relevant life policy can provide life cover as a tax-deductible business expense, which is more efficient than personal cover.
-
Existing cover review, always check whether the client already has protection in place. Don't recommend additional cover without acknowledging what they already have and whether it's still suitable.
The protection checklist for R06
Before you move on from a protection question, run through this checklist:
- Have I identified the specific risk? ✓
- Have I recommended the correct product for that risk? ✓
- Have I justified the recommendation using facts from the case study? ✓
- Have I specified the type of cover, approximate level, and term? ✓
- Have I mentioned trusts, indexation, or other relevant features? ✓
- Have I acknowledged any existing cover the client already has? ✓
If you can tick all six, you've written a strong protection answer.
Protection questions in R06 are predictable, structured, and eminently passable. The candidates who lose marks are usually the ones who rush through without properly identifying the risk, recommend the wrong product, or give answers so generic they could apply to anyone. Follow the framework, use the client's details, and you'll pick up marks that others leave behind.