Outstanding balance insurance for a couple
As a couple, each borrower is insured for a percentage of the borrowed capital, called the covered share. The two shares can total anywhere from 100% — 50% each, for instance — up to 200%, each fully covered. The higher the total, the higher the premium and the better the survivor is protected.
| Provider | Plan | Price | Key points | View plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 BNP Paribas Cardif BNP Paribas Fortis |
— | On request |
| View plan |
 AXA |
— | On request |
| View plan |
 AG |
— | On request |
| View plan |
 NN |
— | On request |
| View plan |
Prices and features surveyed on July 31, 2026. They may have changed since. Always check the offer on the provider’s website before signing up.
What the covered share means
Each borrower's share is the percentage of the outstanding capital the insurer repays on their death. At 50/50, the death of either borrower clears half the remaining loan and the survivor keeps repaying the other half.
At 100/100 — the maximum, totalling 200% — the death of either clears the loan entirely. It is the most protective arrangement and the most expensive.
Everything in between is a trade-off between premium and the survivor's exposure, and it is a trade-off worth making deliberately rather than accepting the default the lender proposes.
Splitting without failing the real test
The common instinct is to split shares in proportion to incomes: the partner earning 70% of the household income takes 70% of the cover. It feels fair and it answers the wrong question.
The question that matters is whether the survivor could service the remaining loan on their own income alone. Where the higher earner dies, the survivor is left with the smaller salary and a share of the mortgage that a proportional split may make unaffordable.
Run the arithmetic both ways round: what remains to be repaid if A dies, on B's income; and the reverse. Where either answer is unaffordable, the split needs adjusting, whatever the salaries say.
One contract or two, and what comes after
Two separate contracts are usually more flexible than a single joint one: they can be priced with different insurers, and one can be cancelled, reviewed or adjusted without touching the other.
That flexibility matters over twenty years. A partner who stops smoking, or whose health situation changes, can seek a review on their own contract alone.
Consider what happens if the couple separates. Two independent contracts are far simpler to unwind than one joint policy, and separation during a mortgage term is common enough to plan for.
Our verdict
Do not split the shares in proportion to incomes without asking the real question first: could the survivor carry the remaining repayments alone? A 70/30 split that mirrors salaries can leave the lower earner facing a mortgage they cannot service. Size the cover against the survivor's capacity, not against the payslips.
Frequently asked questions
What covered share should a couple choose?
Whatever leaves each partner able to service the remaining loan alone. A split mirroring incomes feels fair but can leave the lower earner with an unaffordable mortgage. Run the arithmetic both ways round before accepting the lender's default.
Can we each be covered for 100%?
Yes, totalling 200%. The death of either borrower then clears the loan entirely. It is the most protective arrangement and the most expensive, and for many couples it is the right answer despite the premium.
One joint contract or two separate ones?
Two separate contracts are usually more flexible. They can be placed with different insurers, and one can be reviewed or cancelled without touching the other — useful if a partner stops smoking, or if the couple separates during the term.
What happens to the cover if we separate?
That depends on how the contracts are structured, which is exactly why two independent policies are simpler than one joint one. Separation during a twenty-year mortgage is common enough that the unwinding mechanics are worth checking before signing.