allanb

I don't really understand what has happened. Can you quote exactly, word for word, what your bank has told you?

Sprogster wrote: "…French insurers will not provide travel insurance to foreign residents…" Try this one: L´Européenne d´Assurances 41, Rue des Trois Fontanot 92024 Nanterre Cedex France Tel. +33 1 46 43 64 64 Fax +33 1 55 69 39 76 I have a policy with their German affiliate (ERV), taken out before I knew there was a French one. My policy allows me to live in any country, and covers me for travel anywhere else. If the French policy is similar it might help the OP. And my experience with ERV, including the settlement of a claim, has been excellent.

Pitway mentioned "…a top up policy that will cover the parts not reimbursed by the EHIC/CEAM card…" I should think that every health insurance policy would be a "top-up" in that sense, wouldn't it? I mean that any reimbursement claim would have to disclose amounts covered by another insurer, and you wouldn't be entitled to claim twice for the same expense.

Théière wrote: "The French as far as I know will not allow pull cord switches which is why you cannot find one…" I know nothing about the regulations, but Mr Bricolage stock them; I bought one recently for use in my garage, to operate a light fixed to a roof beam above the workbench. As I don't know what they are called in French I asked for "un interrupteur à corde, comme dans une salle de bain" and the man found them straight away. He knew I was British; perhaps we are known for using bits of string in unusual ways. Anyway, if what I did in my garage is illegal, I'm not sure whether I want to know. (Théière may recall from another recent thread that electricity is not my strong point.)

Thanks for the replies. It looks as though we have a couple of sunny days coming, so I will just wait patiently and let it dry. Théière: there is already a submersible pump, in full working order. In order to explain why the area nevertheless got flooded, I would have to tell you about the stupid mistake I made while cleaning the pool, and that would be just too embarrassing.

As part of my pool system I have a pump whose job is to draw water from a well and maintain pressure in a tank that feeds the pool. The pump is a Jetly Jet 151, monophase (230v). This morning the area that contains the pump became flooded, and it has been submerged for a couple of hours. During that time the breaker blew on the circuit that includes the pump; it seems a fair bet that the breaker was tripped by something in the pump – I'm sure it wasn't designed to work under water, and there's nothing else on that circuit except a couple of light bulbs. I don't have a manual, but the manufacturer's website gives the following information for that particular model: "Protection thermo-ampèremétrique et condensateur permanent incorporé." When I've finished draining the area, and the pump has had a chance to dry out, can I just reset the breaker and switch on? Or is there something that will need to be repaired or replaced? Or is it likely to be worse than that? Any advice welcome.

I heartily support what Andy suggested. When I first saw a French tax return I made a list of all our sources of income, with the best description I could write for each one, and took it to a meeting with the local tax inspector. He wrote on my list the tax schedule reference for each one, which saved me a bundle of work. The descriptions are important, because your tax depends not only on declaring things, but also on whether you declare them in the right place on the return. Things change, of course; there are a couple of his references which are no longer correct, because of changes in the law. But in the first couple of years, when everything was new, it was very useful. And, as Andy says, free. I don't know how to guard against possible mistakes by the tax people. But if you make an appointment by phone, and mention that you have some foreign income (assuming that you have), I think you're likely to get someone with relevant knowledge.

NormanH wrote: "You are right that they only saved the Mutuelle money, but that is because you have one. If you didn't it would have been you who benefited." True; that's why I said "in a case like mine." But it would be a case like mine most of the time, wouldn't it? I think I have read that something like 90% of the population has supplementary cover, so if the practice we're talking about is widespread, the mutuelles are doing very nicely out of it.

NormanH wrote: "Several people do not have Mutuelles and prefer to put the money aside for if it is ever needed. This may well make better financial sense, (I have seen well-argued worked examples) but I think that to have the confidence to do that you need to have a substantial amount of savings available in case it happens tomorrow before you can build up your 'pot'." I agree. It's a difficult decision and it isn't helped by the incomplete or erroneous "information" on the Assurance Maladie website. For instance, I have been trying to assess the likely cost of a knee replacement, and I went to www.ameli.fr and looked up a surgeon who specialises in that operation and who practises at the hospital where I once had surgery. It appears that the average length of stay for a knee replacement is 900 nights, and the surgeon's normal fee is €99,108 euros (but no worries: the sécu will reimburse €59,108). I am not making this up and I have not misread any numbers: that is what it says. Another point is that if Norman is right about staff occasionally choosing 100% when they shouldn't, the ironic thing is that in a case like mine they weren't saving the patient any money. The only people who gained from the 'error' were my mutuelle, who would have had to pay the 20% (or whatever it should have been.)

According to what I can find on the CPAM website, the normal reimbursement rate for the expenses of a hospital stay, including surgery, is 80%. I recently had a stay in hospital for a surgical operation for which CPAM paid 100% of the cost, except for the 'forfait hospitalier' of €18 per day and what they call 'frais de confort personnel' (phone, TV, etc). From the same website, the 100% hospital reimbursement rate is apparently due only in a limited number of cases: – from day 31 onwards, if the stay lasts that long; – for pregnancy complications or newborn baby care; – for accident or illness resulting from professional or work activity; – for a recognised long-term affliction (ALD); – following sexual abuse; – if you are receiving a disability or military pension; – if you are in the Alsace-Moselle system (I wonder why, but never mind); – if you qualify for the CMU. None of these applied in my case. I do have an ALD but it has no connection at all with the surgery I had. And I have a friend who has had exactly the same experience without having an ALD of any kind. Of course I'm not complaining about getting 100%, but I would like to understand why. Not just to see what I'm missing, but because if this is normal, it would affect the decision whether or not to go on buying supplementary insurance from my mutuelle. Does anyone have any relevant knowledge or experience?

RH, I agree, it's a disaster either way – that's my point.

The people of Cyprus are now paying the price for the preservation of the sacred euro. The people of Greece, Spain, etc, have been paying already in the form of mass unemployment; it's just a different kind of pain. Lose 10% of your savings, or lose your job; I'm not sure which is worse. But until the euro is abandoned, this chaotic nonsense will continue. I think it's a tragedy that the EU, which is a worthy concept, is in danger of being wrecked by the obsession with a single currency. But – "We will do whatever is necessary to save the euro," says Mr Draghi. So we've been warned.

In the matter of "desserte" I was lucky; soon after I arrived in France, at the beginning of a street I was about to drive down, there was a no-entry sign with a notice under it saying SAUF DESSERTE LOCALE. It didn't seem very likely to me that they would be refusing entry except to local puddings, so when I got home I did some dictionary research and found out the truth.

Sid: sorry I misquoted you. My browser doesn't allow me to use the forum's "quote" procedure, and I have to find a clever way round it. Obviously I wasn't clever enough.

Sid wrote: "…the manager finally came out, asked why I wanted four thousand euros of my own money…" It's illegal to make a cash payment to a professional exceeding 3,000 euros. Nothing to do with the float problem, of course, but it may have been a reason for his question.

No doubt greed plays a part, as Norman says, but the theory is that in a free market it's balanced by the force of competition – and generally I think it is. You can always go to another company. For what it's worth, my mutuelle's increases on the last five renewals have been 3,0%, 5.1%, 4.1%, 3.9%, and last year 6.0%. (I've had the same ALD throughout that time, by the way.) I can't say that those numbers are unreasonable. The insurer is covering not only the effect of inflation, but also the effects of my increasing age. However, February is when they usually announce the following year's premium, so there may be bad news in store for me. If my premium goes up by 12% or anything like it, I will certainly ask them why.

What did they call "negro spirituals" in French?

Does anyone have any suggestions for a poor Mac user?  I seem to have the opposite of some people's problem with the 'quote' procedure: I can't get it to work in Safari (I always get the dreaded message that begins with <BLOCKQUOTE>) but it works in Firefox – which unfortunately isn't my favourite browser.

Here's something that may interest anyone who worries about the invasion of the French language by English.  It's from a French insurance policy, listing events that are covered for public liability.  They include: Concert (à l'exclusion du rock, du rapp, de la rave party, de la techno, du ska, du raegge*). * Their spelling, not mine.

Sorry, duplication.

Like Sid, I had to search to find those limits on my bank account. They are there, but rather annoyingly, I couldn't find them in any index or list of contents; I really had to comb through the small print. However, as far as I can see they only apply to use of the debit card. I think I could write a check for whatever I have in the account. Taking Sid's other point: if you want to use an online bank (which I do) but you also want to be able to deposit cash, you can always keep the online account but open a Livret A with a "normal" bank; I use the Banque Postale. Additionally you then have a second source for cash withdrawals, in case the ATMs are on strike.

I had a UK bank card years ago: debit or credit, I can't remember which, but it also functioned as a cheque guarantee card – up to a certain limit, of course. It was £100 if I remember correctly, but there's been some inflation since then. Do such things still exist?

If we're talking about cash withdrawals from ATMs, I think it's perfectly reasonable for the bank to impose a limit. They have to allow for withdrawals throughout the weekend, for instance, and there can't be an unlimited amount of cash in the machine.

[quote user="andyh4"][quote user="allanb"]If the receiving account is not in euros, so that a currency exchange is necessary, a virement is still possible but it won't be subject to the SEPA rules.   [/quote] Not sure quite what the last sentence is supposed to imply…[/quote] It wasn't meant to "imply" anything – it's just a statement!  Certainly a bank can, if it wants to, make a transfer into another currency for the same fee as if it was subject to the SEPA rules, which you illustrated.  But it isn't obliged to; it may charge more.  Some do, some don't.

There's some confusion here.  The UK is not in the euro zone, but it is in the SEPA; even people who work in banks sometimes get this wrong.  The rules generally known as the SEPA rules apply to transfers between two euro accounts within the SEPA. So you can transfer euros to the UK in accordance with the SEPA rules, provided that the recipient in the UK has a euro account, which is quite possible although a bit unusual.  If the receiving account is not in euros, so that a currency exchange is necessary, a virement is still possible but it won't be subject to the SEPA rules.