Latest studies confirm that even for six to eight euros, there are good deals for a travel health insurance. Its also recommended to update your insurance, since many vendors have renewed their terms.
But often, the conditions have not been automatically converted. If you are an insurer with better conditions would like to switch, you can terminate its contract with a period of three months to the maturity notice.
In recent years, therefore, inter alia, the conditions for returning to the home country improves. Many insurers now offer this always then, if he was "sensible and reasonable" is. Fewer and fewer providers require, for example, that a return of the question only if the insured more than two weeks in the hospital should lie.
Even for six to eight euros, there is a very good offer. Travel abroad for the protection is generally recommended, because the health insurance companies outside Europe usually do not take care in Europe is often only a part. Returning to the home country pays no cash, even the most private is not.
Holidaymakers should not, however, to leave the emergency services on behalf of the insurer for a suitable doctor looking abroad. Only three out of ten emergency services were at a test call from the Azores to the nearest s correctly call.
Often stressed employees were therefore have no information or send the caller to the remote island's capital, in one case even on the Portuguese mainland. It is therefore advisable to evaluate the necessary information before the commencement of the journey.
Posts mit dem Label hospitalization werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label hospitalization werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
3/19/2009
2/23/2009
Judges: Common diseases don`t count for cancellation
The hospitalization in a hospital for the purpose of finding a diagnosis of complaints isn`t a reason for cancellation.
In a now determined by the Amtsgericht Munich instance, booked the later applicants, 22 January 2007 for himself and his wife on holiday to Norway to the total price of 3230 euros. The 14-day trip should be commenced on 28.3.07. The wife of the plaintiff since 1996, suffered fainting attacks due to heart disease. She received in 2002 so a pacemaker. In October 2006 there were about dizziness. That's why she went on 5.1.07 in medical treatment. On 9.3.07, she went to a routine review of the pacemaker in a university hospital and was there for the clarification of the cause of the dizziness of stationary. On the same day her husband canceled the trip and demanded cancellation of the travel insurer reimbursed. It refused to pay, since the illness of the wife already existed for a while. The husband brought attention to the action before the AG in Munich. The judge dismissed the claim, however:
The travel insurance should only pay if the trip due to an unexpected serious illness was unreasonable. This was done but the cancellation because the wife of another diagnosis had been stationary. A cancellation as a result of diagnosis performed but not covered under the insured risk. You know, just because the diagnosis has yet to be implemented, not yet, whether a disease exists. In addition, the disease would also, one should accept it, certainly not unexpected. The wife finally had since October 2006 to the attacks suffered from impotence and at 5.1.07, so even before the posting in medical treatment.
In a now determined by the Amtsgericht Munich instance, booked the later applicants, 22 January 2007 for himself and his wife on holiday to Norway to the total price of 3230 euros. The 14-day trip should be commenced on 28.3.07. The wife of the plaintiff since 1996, suffered fainting attacks due to heart disease. She received in 2002 so a pacemaker. In October 2006 there were about dizziness. That's why she went on 5.1.07 in medical treatment. On 9.3.07, she went to a routine review of the pacemaker in a university hospital and was there for the clarification of the cause of the dizziness of stationary. On the same day her husband canceled the trip and demanded cancellation of the travel insurer reimbursed. It refused to pay, since the illness of the wife already existed for a while. The husband brought attention to the action before the AG in Munich. The judge dismissed the claim, however:
The travel insurance should only pay if the trip due to an unexpected serious illness was unreasonable. This was done but the cancellation because the wife of another diagnosis had been stationary. A cancellation as a result of diagnosis performed but not covered under the insured risk. You know, just because the diagnosis has yet to be implemented, not yet, whether a disease exists. In addition, the disease would also, one should accept it, certainly not unexpected. The wife finally had since October 2006 to the attacks suffered from impotence and at 5.1.07, so even before the posting in medical treatment.
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)