Jump to content

France backs down on access to CMU for inactifs


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am relieved that there seems to be some change around the corner, hopefully common sense will prevail.  As someone who is emigrating to France as an early retiree next April, the current rules and how they might affect my future residency (and that of my family) have been of considerable concern.  Don't get me wrong, I think it is only right that those who can afford it should pay their way, and I certainly don't think that the UK's profligacy in allowing free access to the NHS for EU nationals solely on their residency in the UK is right or sensible (I understand that only the UK and Austria in the EU are so generous).  What people such as myself are faced with under the current French regulations however is uncertainty.  Once the S1 runs out (after 21 months in my case, unless you become employed in France or e.g. start a small business under the AE scheme) you are faced with an obligation to obtain a level of comprehensive private medical cover which does not in fact currently exist in the commercial market.  Moreover, any ailment or condition may preclude you from obtaining any good cover that is available.  Once you think you have completed 5 years residency and can in theory rejoin the French health system, the French authorities can look at the cover you have (or have not) obtained for yourself at huge cost and just say, 'sorry, this doesn't meet our insurance requirements so bye bye, you can't stay'.  In no-one's eyes can this be fair and non-discriminatory and the EU is right to object.  As an aside is it interesting about how close the French are protecting the euro, the EU and the Greeks by offering to roll over their loans and give them 30 years to pay, but choose to ignore this aspect of EU doctrine, i.e. freedom of residence and movement within the EU for its citizens.

All I want is that when I get to the expiry of my S1 entitlement, and whatever my medical status at the time, someone says, 'of course you and your family can stay on in the French health system and remain resident Graeme, but it will cost you X% of whatever worldwide earnings or pensions you have'.  I'd much rather pay the FG than some insurance company on the make, even if it costs more.  At least that way, if I end up loving France as much as I hope I will, I won't need to return to the UK against my will because I haven't fulfilled some impossible to fulfill criteria.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you can achieve that DD.

I wonder if anyone has ever been sent back to the UK because they didn't have proper medical cover? Not that you would want to take the risk.

I'm rather embarrassed to admit that we didn't have any medical cover for the first 3 years we were here. Purely through lack of knowledge. We just paid upfront if we needed to see the doctor, dentist etc. Nobody ever said anything. We were lucky we didn't need any major medical attention at the time.

Eventually got cover as retirees from  UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Patf, on that point I don't think the question has arisen yet.  The 5 year residency rule and restricted access to the French health system for early retirees was introduced in October 2007, so it won't be until October 2012 that anyone would be able to re-apply to access the French health system on the 5 year residency ticket.  Sounds as though by then the rules may well have been modified, so hopefully no-one will be 'frog-marched' out of France in an undeniably discriminatory fashion.  That's what I'm hoping anyway....... 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I wonder if anyone has ever been sent back to the UK because they didn't have proper medical cover?"

I don't think so.

I don't think that anybody checks since the abandonment of the requirement of a carte de séjour.

there are plenty of people winging it on a CEAM issued in the UK, and keep a convenient address there so there can pretend to be on holiday if they have a problem.

I even know one who claims APL, never makes a Tax declaration and has a French-registered car, but in 'on holiday' if he is ill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="cooperlola"]we may never know under how much scrutiny one's private policy might have come in order to satisfy the 5 year rule [/quote]But I think you can guarantee that it will be applied differently in each and every department of the land, if not by each and every foncionere working in them !

Fun days ahead [;-)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read this all the way through, but this part sounds like 'no change to the current ruling'?

All Union citizens shall have the right of residence on the territory of another Member State for

a period of longer than three months if they:

(a) are workers or self-employed persons in the host Member State; or

(b) have sufficient resources for themselves and their family members not to become a burden on

the social assistance system of the host Member State during their period of residence and

have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State; or

(c) – are enrolled at a private or public establishment, accredited or financed by the host

Member State on the basis of its legislation or administrative practice, for the principal

purpose of following a course of study, including vocational training; and

– have comprehensive sickness insurance cover in the host Member State and assure the

relevant national authority, by means of a declaration or by such equivalent means as

they may choose, that they have sufficient resources for themselves and their family

members not to become a burden on the social assistance system of the host Member

State during their period of residence; or

(d) are family members accompanying or joining a Union citizen who satisfies the conditions
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pommier, all that will change as a result of the new ruling, afaik (and we won't know the details until the statement is published, I'm just reading between the lines) is that the comprehensive sickness insurance may well be once again allowed to be CMU (as it was before November 2007), or it could be some sort of umbrella private scheme.  Whatever, the EU ruling should prevent the FG from excluding the pre-retired from free movement on the grounds of pre-exisiting health problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly Coops, simply give me an opportunity to pay into a scheme, be it private or public, which will guarantee that neither I nor my family will ever be forced to leave France because of my state of health or perceived lack of legal residency.  If it is to be private, let it guarantee acceptance at reasonable average rates even when it covers pre-existing conditions and let the French government state clearly that it meets their requirements for legal residency.  If it is to be public through CMU (or simlar), that is probably simpler to administer and the more likely option, but if so let the FG levy whatever charges to non-actifs they see fit, as long as they are not wholly unreasonable.  Me then happy, EU happy, sorted!      
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daft Doctor, I do not think Coops is actually saying I am totally wrong, in just providing a link to the directive.As the directive states that that the rights of an EU citizen to stay in another EU country more than three months has limitations, one of which is that one must not be an unreasonable burden, which in my mind puts a degree of uncertainty where early retirees are concerned.

I hope Coops confidence that all will change is borne out, as I am more sceptical about the French government, who have a track record of ignoring EU directives, especially with a Presidential election next year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen both the French and the EU statements which were given to one of the journalists and they are well summarised in the link in the first post on this thread and are very brief and don't give a great deal away at this stage.  One thing which stands out in the European Commission's statement, to me, is the fact that they insist that they will closely monitor the FG's response and make sure that they comply with the ruling.

As Sprogster says, although the Free Movement Principle is well stated, there are "loopholes" or rather, conditions, which citizens must fulfill.  One of these is that of not being an "unreasonable burden" on the state, and this is what the FG used to exclude pre-retired non-French EU citizens from CMU who arrived in France after November 2007 and in effect made it illegal for those in that category who had pre-existing health problems to live in France.  What happened then is well-documented and has been discussed on here in threads far longer than this one!  What remained as a problem, and what the EU objected to was the last part and I have every confidence that that aspect will be resolved.  What I don't know, is whether new arrivals will be allowed into CMU, whether some will, or whether some new scheme will be introduced, perhaps a full private scheme along the lines of top-up insurance is regulated now, whereby it's illegal for insurers to exclude those with pre-existing conditions, or just a privately operated umbrella scheme for newcomers.  Your guess is as good as mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, me too.  Whatever, as long as the discriminatory aspects of the regs are got rid off, I will feel that we got what we wanted all along.  I was never averse to paying if one could afford it, just the fact that no matter how rich one might be, it was illegal to retire early here.  It would be great if it didn't matter and that the sick had a right to treatment, regardless, but that's for the future (one can but hope!)  It's all about money and votes, let's face it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sprogster"]coops, my bet is that whatever they come up with will have an associated price tag that will intentionally discourage lower income early retirees, as that is still the French political undercurrent.[/quote]

 

Seen on another forum that one of the current inactifs who has been assessed on "assets" rather than declared income has been quoted just over €9500 for a family of 4 for CMU, so it will be interesting to see what criteria are introduced . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the CMU contribution calculations have, for some time afaik, had the potential to be assessed on this basis.  Some time ago, there was a guy on one of the fora whose bank statements were analysed and all the withdrawals he had made from his savings account in the UK were included when asesssing the base for his 8% (although not for tax) calculation.  I can see some logic behind this myself and like you, Tinabee,  imagine that there'll be more of this in the future when people appear to be living better than their RFR might suggest they can.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="cooperlola"]

Yes, me too.  Whatever, as long as the discriminatory aspects of the regs are got rid off, I will feel that we got what we wanted all along.  I was never averse to paying if one could afford it, just fact that no matter how rich onthe e might be, it was illegal to retire early here.  It would be great if it didn't matter and that the sick had a right to treatment, regardless, but that's for the future (one can but hope!)  It's all about money and votes, let's face it.

 

[/quote]

Come off it. That has never been the case.

If an asset rich sick Brit couldn't get anyone to sell them health insurance that isn't the fault of the French State

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK then, Norman. Say you (and I mean you, personally) were very wealth and wanted to retire early to France.  Your private insurance must cover THIS LOT to comply with the law.  You find me an insurer who'll take you on.  Bear in mind that you can't offer to pay yourself upfront, you must be insured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="cooperlola"]

OK then, Norman. Say you (and I mean you, personally) were very wealth and wanted to retire early to France.  Your private insurance must cover THIS LOT to comply with the law.  You find me an insurer who'll take you on.  Bear in mind that you can't offer to pay yourself upfront, you must be insured.

[/quote]

But it doesn't make it illegal to retire early to France.

Just very difficult (or impossible)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...