In its latest issue of October 17, 2017, Stiftung Warentest raised its finger for the first time on supplementary care insurance. The consumer advocates aimed at the circle of people with lower incomes and therefore inevitably lower expected pension from.

Contribution increases inevitably

Contribution increases inevitably

As in all other areas of medical care, cost increases are also preprogrammed in nursing. For the insured in the statutory long-term care insurance, this inevitably means a drifting apart between the benefits of long-term care insurance on the one hand and its own expenses on the other.

In this case, private supplementary insurance providers are a little easier to adjust their premiums to compensate for the cost. For the insured, however, this means a steady increase in the premium.

Against this background, only those persons who are sure that they can pay a long-term increase should be able to rely on private long-term care insurance. There are only very few companies among the insurers who refrain from paying any further contributions when the care claim occurs. Another reason can be found in the number of nursing cases and the associated costs.

The current test

The current test

The consumer advocates examined 31 nursing care insurance and four nursing care rates. In the daily allowance insurance, the money is at leisure, with the care costs, the actual costs are paid up to the agreed amount. The calculation was based on a 55-year-old policyholder. The insurance conditions were tested in relation to the contribution. This was an average of 87 USD per month for the model calculation. Altogether cut 18 tariffs with “good”.

In principle, supplementary care insurance is almost a must. As “financial test” writes, in about 25 percent of nursing cases, the benefits from the statutory long-term care insurance were insufficient. Around 450,000 patients had to file a request for assistance with the social services.

Why the warning?

Why the warning?

A long-term care insurance only provides a benefit if a degree of care is also determined. If the income as a working person is sufficient to pay the premium, it can be scarce with the beginning of the pension, with meanwhile increased contributions. A termination of the contract, however, means the total loss of funds paid up to then. A refund is not provided in any case. Subsidy exemptions are only possible under certain conditions, such as unemployment or a longer stay abroad.

Before concluding a supplementary long-term care insurance, therefore, the exact consideration is whether a continuation will be possible even with increasing contribution and pension.

Need clearly given on the other hand

Need clearly given on the other hand

Not only the number of those who need public assistance in case of need, but also the state subsidies, shows that the statutory long-term care insurance is not sufficient. The state-sponsored long-term care insurance,however, in the price-performance ratio as too expensive. Even if the legislator grants a monthly subsidy of five USD under certain conditions of the tariffs.

The reason behind the premium calculation by insurers is also the fact that there is a presumption that poor health risks are included in the insured persons’ stock.

How difficult the topic is on the other hand, shows the lack of recommendation of consumer advocates. The tip for those affected to lower incomes, to provide for other care, falls a bit thin, a concrete action recommendation would have been desirable. An old people’s flat share, the care-appropriate conversion of the own flat or the care by relatives, as stated, solves the cost problem only rudimentary.