|
|
Health
Topic has 44 replies.
 
 
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
06/01/2008, 23:47
|
groslard
Joined on 26/12/2007
Posts 255
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
You have your finger on the pulse ErnieY I wasn't quite accurate when I talked about withdrawing the E121..it may be applicable elsewhere in Europe What I was thinking about is granting it free to UK pensioners, who therefore get the large part of their health care free, as opposed to French people who continue to pay 8% social security charges after retirement.
So I was more thinking on the lines that a Future UK government might ask British retired people abroad to pay NI contributions to off set this concession
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
07/01/2008, 0:31
|
groslard
Joined on 26/12/2007
Posts 255
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
Clair wrote: | From what I have read so far, there is no exemption for ALD sufferers.
As things stand, medication and medical acts related to ALDs are already listed seperately on prescriptions and therefore, are already exempt from charges. In effect, these will remain exempt, but each unrelated medication and medical act will be subject to a franchise médicale.
|
|
I'm not sure that this is right. I think that the franchise médicale is applied both to ALD related and none related medication and medical acts. The difference is that the ALDs are paid at 100% minus the franchise, but the others are only paid at the normal level, again minus the franchise.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
07/01/2008, 8:45
|
Clair

Joined on 23/08/2004
------- Forum Moderator ------- Lot (46)
Posts 6,782
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
05/03/2008, 9:43
|
Logan

Joined on 23/08/2004
Posts 739
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
The franchises médicales charge is dependant on the type of drug that is prescribed by your doctor. Some are 0.50 Euros and some are 2 Euros and 1.50 Euros and so on. My last prescription was charged a total of 9 Euros. Since this charge is not recoverable from the mutuelle contract I am now beginning to wonder why I have one. There seems to be so many things that mutuelles no longer reimburse. Likely this is a method of cutting their costs. However I am getting close to cancelling my contract and taking the risk myself as I always did up to 2 years ago. Their charges are increasing annually and payments cut back.
Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori. (Horace).
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
05/03/2008, 17:21
|
Judith
Joined on 01/02/2006
Posts 253
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
Logan wrote: | | Since this charge is not recoverable from the mutuelle contract I am now beginning to wonder why I have one. There seems to be so many things that mutuelles no longer reimburse. Likely this is a method of cutting their costs. However I am getting close to cancelling my contract and taking the risk myself as I always did up to 2 years ago. Their charges are increasing annually and payments cut back. |
|
I get quite annoyed with the insistence that you "must" have a top up, they do not make it clear that you could decide to pay the extra yourself. As someone who has had to pay privately in the UK for dental treatment for many years (try and find an NHS dentist and you will know why) and who gets £30 contribution from our "beloved" NHS for what is described as complex lenses for specs which cost £500, you can see I don't quite subscribe to the top up idea. We have decided to manage without, and so far, so good. As in the UK the only thing I get free are my visits to the GP (and a recent Xray at the hospital), and hubby hasn't needed to see the doctor for as long as I can remember.
By the way, those who get E forms, only get them if they are entitled to them, ie have paid enough contributions into the system for enough years. It is not a free perk - we''ve all worked hard and long for the privilege of having one.
Judith W1 and Aude
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
05/03/2008, 17:22
|
Logan

Joined on 23/08/2004
Posts 739
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have now completed a spread sheet including my payments over 2 years to the Mutuelle and my claims. I find I am contributing to the profits of my particular company by some 80% of my payments. Now you may ask; insurance is there 'just in case you have to have an operation'. However that has already happened and the state paid the lot! (17000 euros) Why? The Mutuelle claims to the state (CMU) that a particular condition is life threatening so they should not pick up their part of the bill. I cannot imagine many operations that are not.
So I am left with the question why on earth should I pay upwards of 150 euros per month. I agree accidents might happen where 'life threatening' may not apply. (Broken arm or leg for instance). However the cash you save over a period without said Mutuelle will more than compensate. In other words your risk not theirs.
Mutuelles seem to me to be a poor investment and a form of taxation you can legally avoid. I am suprised that this has not been debated before on the forum. Am I missing something?
Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori. (Horace).
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
05/03/2008, 17:27
|
Judith
Joined on 01/02/2006
Posts 253
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
Logan
We always reckoned that you would have to have a lot of treatment before the top up insurance would pay for itself. You've just proved our point. Thanks!
Judith W1 and Aude
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
05/03/2008, 17:53
|
ErnieY

Joined on 05/12/2006
Nr Prayssac (Lot)
Posts 3,453
|
Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a tough call, especially for those less financially able to pay for a mutuelle, but you might want to reconsider your statement "I cannot imagine many operations that are not" (life threatening) ![Cry Out [:'(]](/cs/images/emotions/cry.gif)
I have a friend in UK who, whilst out riding his Harley, simply missed his footing at the road side when he stopped to let a car come the other way. The bike fell on his ankle shattering just about every bone in it to the extent that the doctors wanted to amputate it which he flatly refused. That was perhaps 7 or 8 years ago and I've now lost count of the operations he's had on it since, it's around 10 for sure, plus the post op physio etc., and I don't think they've finished yet.
Absolutely none of the above was life threatning and I wouldn't even want to contemplate 30% of the cost of that lot ![Woot! [:-))]](/cs/images/emotions/w00t.gif)
My doctor said one drink per day, I can live with that !
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 3 of 5 (45 items)
|
< 1 2 3 4 5 > |
|
|
|
France Forum » Living » Health » Re: Changes to medical reimbursements on 1 January 08
|
|
|
|