Joined on 05/05/2006
72 - Sarthe - home of les 24 heures du Mans
Posts 7,597
Re: "French Health Issues" Website Launch
But that would take all the fun out of it, Gary. Never spoil a good story for the sake of the truth, as my Dad always used to say. All those euros I paid into the CMU last year were a figment of my imagination, I reckon.
Healthcare Issues Site
How can it be? Britain hasn't changed anything - it's the French that have changed things, according to them, in line with European residence rules.
In fact Britain is far more generous to its early retired by giving them a nominal two years of E106 cover. Few other countries offer that.
Well the problem is that Britain doesn't cover people between the end of the E106 and the start of the E121. That is a British decision . I personally am lobbying for the end of both these allowances, since they are illogical given that NHS cover is for people 'normally resident in the UK' I hope a future Government will take the bull by the horns and cut off all allowances from people who have decided to cut themselves off from Britain, and who are the only retirees in Europe who expect to have a first-class Health Service, into which they haven't paid all their working lives, and for which they don't pay now
If you look at ‘Statutory Instrument 2006 No. 1003 The Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006’ you will see that your interpretation of NHS cover for people being based on normally resident is not correct.
The E106 is an EU wide 'form' not exclusive to the UK. As regards the UK's arrangements, the 'non-employed' version of the form is granted to people who could still get UK short-term Incapacity Benefit if they claimed it. Once their entitlement to claim that benefit expires they are no longer entitled to the E106. To qualify for the entitlement the person must have paid either employed or self-employed NI contributions over the last two complete contribution years. So, having paid contributions and other taxes, the recipients are not freeloading from the UK government when they are granted an E106. It simply certifies that they are entitled to UK short-term Incapacity Benefit if they claimed it
As regards freeloading in France, the UK pays France a sum for EU Citizens with an E106 from the UK living in France to cover healthcare costs so they are not 'freeloading' in that respect.
By the way...UK is not just a residence criterion as you will see from the FHI site.
a simple example: "Until 1st October 2007, UK nationals wishing to become
resident in France were obliged, under French law, to affiliate, and where
appropriate, contribute to the CMU. Comprehensive health insurance was not
even an option. " Absolutely not true! I paid Private Health Insurance from 1995 to 1998, when I qualified for the Sécu (NOT the CMU) by cotisations.. And I have never been affiliated to the CMU.
Are you saying that private health insurance was an allowable option after the 2000 ruling? My understanding is that early retired immigrants from UK had, BY LAW, to be affiliated to the CMU and that PHI was not allowed. Am I wrong? A simple yes or no to each quesion will suffice. Steve ,Fujeirah Emirate, U.A.E + 50 (in France) ...........................................................................
Joined on 10/04/2005
Small village in the Dordogne, near St Cyprien
Posts 1,994
Re: "French Health Issues" Website Launch
groslard wrote:
It's not an "agenda" its logical. I have always detested freeloaders
It only seems to be logical to you groslard and many people here may detest your aggressive and combative tone in many of your postings. Mods, I'm offended by this comment - so does it contravene the rules for this Forum?
Groslard is quite entitled to detest freeloaders and I'm sure his right to express that preference does not contravene the forum rules.
However, it is clear from his posts that he has totally misunderstood the facts of the situation, so he has been directing his comments at the wrong people...
Joined on 21/01/2005
------- Forum Moderator ------- Lot
Posts 4,366
Re: "French Health Issues" Website Launch
Sunday Driver wrote:
However, it is clear from his posts that he has totally misunderstood the facts of the situation, so he has been directing his comments at the wrong people...
Quite right SD, ignorance can be forgiven.
Cathy
Always keep your words soft and sweet, just in case you have to eat them.
I personally, have found it extremely useful. People have put in a huge amount of work for which they should be both congratulated and thanked. To say it 'can't be taken seriously' when many people are in a very serious position is, in my opinion, at best unhelpful and at worst an attempt at sabotage. Constructive feedback and corrections to inaccuracies, OK. Sweeping negative statements aimed at undermining sincere efforts to help others, No. If you don't like it just leave it alone. Tom
I personally, have found it extremely useful. People have put in a huge amount of work for which they should be both congratulated and thanked. To say it 'can't be taken seriously' when many people are in a very serious position is, in my opinion, at best unhelpful and at worst an attempt at sabotage. Constructive feedback and corrections to inaccuracies, OK. Sweeping negative statements aimed at undermining sincere efforts to help others, No. If you don't like it just leave it alone. Tom
Or contribute to it by emailing FHI your suggested amendments
By the way...UK is not just a residence criterion as you will see from the FHI site.
a simple example: "Until 1st October 2007, UK nationals wishing to become
resident in France were obliged, under French law, to affiliate, and where
appropriate, contribute to the CMU. Comprehensive health insurance was not
even an option. " Absolutely not true! I paid Private Health Insurance from 1995 to 1998, when I qualified for the Sécu (NOT the CMU) by cotisations.. And I have never been affiliated to the CMU.
Are you saying that private health insurance was an allowable option after the 2000 ruling? My understanding is that early retired immigrants from UK had, BY LAW, to be affiliated to the CMU and that PHI was not allowed. Am I wrong? A simple yes or no to each quesion will suffice.
No they could work, or run a business. the only had to join the CMU if they didn't want to do that, so it was a choice to remain idle. Remember these are people under retiremernt age by definition.