New research highlighted by FT Adviser has raised fresh concerns about the number of UK workers who may be financially unprepared if illness or injury prevents them from working.

The findings, based on LV=’s latest resilience research, suggest a significant gap remains between how financially secure many people feel and how prepared they may actually be for a prolonged interruption to earnings. For mortgage borrowers, landlords, company directors and self-employed professionals, that gap should not be seen simply as an insurance issue.

It is a mortgage resilience issue.

Most mortgage conversations focus heavily on interest rates, affordability, lender criteria and deposit size. Those factors matter, but they all rely on one underlying assumption: that the borrower’s income continues.

If that income stops, even temporarily, the mortgage does not.

Monthly repayments still need to be made. Household bills continue. School fees, childcare, insurance premiums, credit commitments and business expenses may all remain in place. For landlords, rental income may help, but property portfolios can still face void periods, arrears, maintenance costs and refinancing pressures.

This is why protection planning deserves far more attention within mortgage advice than it often receives.

The Research Highlights A Serious Preparedness Gap

FT Adviser reported on 26 June 2026 that Britain remains worryingly underprepared for the financial impact of becoming too ill to work. LV=’s wider research has also highlighted that many workers would feel more financially resilient if they had protection in place, but a large proportion still do not hold cover designed to support income during illness or injury.

That distinction is important.

Many people believe they are financially resilient because they have a good income, own property or hold some savings. However, resilience is not only about what someone earns today. It is about how long their financial commitments could be maintained if that income was interrupted.

For a mortgage borrower, this can be a very different calculation.

A household may appear financially comfortable while both incomes are being received. The mortgage may be affordable, the property may have equity and the wider financial position may look strong. But if one income disappears for several months, the position can change quickly.

Savings that looked substantial can be used faster than expected. Investment assets may not be easy to access without creating tax consequences or selling at the wrong time. Rental properties may be valuable, but they are not always liquid. Business profits may reduce if the owner or director is unable to work.

That is the real risk behind the protection gap.

Mortgage Affordability Depends On More Than Today’s Income

When a lender assesses a mortgage application, affordability is normally based on current and expected income. That may include salary, bonus, dividends, net profit, rental income, pension income or other sources of earnings.

But the lender is not usually stress-testing how the household would cope if illness removed that income for six months, twelve months or longer.

This matters because mortgages are long-term commitments. A borrower may take a two-year or five-year fixed rate, but the mortgage itself may run for twenty-five, thirty or even thirty-five years. Over that period, it is entirely possible that illness, injury or a serious health event could affect someone’s ability to work.

For employed borrowers, employer sick pay may offer some support, but the level of support varies significantly. Some employees have generous benefits. Others may have only limited protection.

For self-employed borrowers, contractors and company directors, the position can be more exposed. If they are unable to work, income may reduce quickly. In some cases, it may stop altogether. Yet the mortgage, household expenditure and business overheads may all continue.

This is where many borrowers discover that being approved for a mortgage and being financially resilient throughout the mortgage term are not the same thing.

Why Self-Employed Borrowers And Directors Need To Pay Particular Attention

Self-employed borrowers and company directors often have complex income structures.

They may take a modest salary and dividends. They may retain profits within a limited company. Their income may fluctuate year to year. They may have multiple companies, partnership income, investment income or property income.

These structures can work well from a tax and business planning perspective, but they can create additional vulnerability if income is interrupted.

A salaried employee may have contractual sick pay, group income protection or employer-funded benefits. A business owner may have none of those unless they have arranged protection separately.

There is also a practical issue.

Many successful businesses depend heavily on the owner. If that individual is unable to work, sales may slow, key relationships may be affected and management decisions may be delayed. Even if the business continues trading, profitability can be affected.

For a company director with a large residential mortgage, school fees, investment commitments and business liabilities, this can create financial pressure much faster than expected.

That does not mean every director needs the same type or level of protection. It does mean the conversation should be had properly.

High Earners Can Be More Vulnerable Than They Realise

There is a misconception that protection is mainly relevant to lower-income households.

In reality, high earners can be extremely exposed because their commitments often rise with their income.

A senior executive, partner, surgeon, lawyer, finance professional or entrepreneur may have a significant mortgage, private education costs, second homes, investment borrowing and wider family commitments. Their income may be high, but the lifestyle and financial structure built around that income may also be substantial.

If illness prevents them from working, the monthly shortfall can be considerable.

This is particularly relevant in the current market, where many borrowers have already seen mortgage costs rise following the end of very low interest rates. A household that could previously absorb a short-term income shock may now have less margin because mortgage repayments, tax costs, insurance and general living expenses have all increased.

The question is not simply whether the borrower can afford the mortgage today.

The better question is whether the borrower could continue to afford the mortgage if their income changed unexpectedly.

Landlords And Property Investors Are Not Immune

Property investors may feel they have greater resilience because they own income-producing assets.

Often, they do.

Rental income can provide valuable diversification and may reduce reliance on employment income. However, landlords should not assume that property wealth automatically protects them from income shock.

A rental portfolio can experience void periods, arrears, maintenance costs, insurance increases, service charge rises and tax liabilities. Refinancing can also create pressure, particularly where interest rates have increased or lender stress tests have tightened.

If the landlord’s personal income is also interrupted by illness, the combined effect can be significant.

This is especially important for portfolio landlords, developers and investors who use personal income to support borrowing, fund deposits, cover refurbishment costs or manage short-term cash flow. Even where the underlying assets remain strong, liquidity can become the challenge.

Being asset rich does not always mean being cash-flow resilient.

Protection Should Sit Alongside Mortgage Planning

Protection planning is not about assuming something will go wrong. It is about recognising that large financial commitments need proper contingency planning.

For mortgage borrowers, that may include income protection, life cover, critical illness cover or a combination of different policies. It may also involve reviewing existing employer benefits, savings, investment liquidity, business continuity arrangements and family support.

The right answer will vary from client to client.

A young family with a large mortgage may have very different needs from a high-net-worth borrower with substantial liquid assets. A company director may require a different approach from an employed professional with strong workplace benefits. A landlord with multiple properties may need to think differently from a first-time buyer.

The important point is that protection should not be an afterthought.

It should be considered as part of the wider mortgage strategy.

Why This Matters More In The Current Market

The protection gap matters more now because many households have less room for error.

Mortgage payments have increased for borrowers coming off older fixed rates. Inflation has put pressure on household budgets. Landlords have faced higher finance costs, tax changes and regulatory demands. Business owners have had to manage wage inflation, operating costs and uncertain demand.

Against that backdrop, an income shock can have a greater impact than it might have done several years ago.

A borrower who previously had enough spare monthly income to absorb disruption may now find their budget far tighter. Savings may already have been reduced by higher living costs. Refinancing may be less straightforward if income has fallen or health has changed.

That makes early planning more valuable.

Protection is usually easiest to arrange when someone is healthy, earning well and not under financial pressure. Waiting until after an illness, diagnosis or income interruption can reduce options significantly.

A Mortgage Is Not Just A Loan

A mortgage is often viewed as a product.

In reality, it is part of a wider financial structure.

For homeowners, it is linked to family security, long-term wealth and lifestyle. For landlords, it is linked to investment cash flow and portfolio strategy. For company directors and high earners, it is often connected to business income, tax planning and liquidity.

That is why mortgage advice should not stop at securing the loan.

The right finance structure matters, but so does the ability to maintain it.

This is particularly important for clients with complex financial lives. A borrower with multiple income streams, investment properties, retained company profits or international assets may have strong overall wealth, but that does not automatically mean they have the right protection in place.

The issue is not always affordability.

It is resilience.