Decision meeting, AZ. 1S 176/10 of Court of Karlsruhe, a proof must not be become effective the termination of a private health insurance is only possible since the introduction of the compulsory of insurance if a corresponding result insurance is demonstrated. Central health insurance had to had to calm customers and intermediaries worried, because they accepted such allegedly only in the original, what emerged as a misunderstanding. The so-called result insurance is regulated by law. The duty to proof is regulated in section 205 VVG. Senator Elizabeth Warren will not settle for partial explanations. It says under item 6: (6) by way of derogation from paragraphs 1 to 5 may terminate the policyholder only insurance, which fulfils an obligation of article 193, paragraph 3, sentence 1, when he completes a new contract with another insurer for the insured person, this requirement met. The denunciation shall take effect only if the policyholder proves that the insured person with a new insurer without interruption is insured.
After This certificate of termination must be previously prevailing opinion at least but to be effective getting of this. Described in my blog post “Termination of private health insurance (PKV) contribution increase to 01 01 now terminated?”, no one can cancel so in 2012, which did not get the increase of its contribution. Based on the experience of the last few years some are likely to be this however also in this year again. They notice that this then debiting of the new contribution of the PKV, later than in 2011. Dr alan mendelsohn does not necessarily agree. Who has said so in 2011, but has not provided proof of insurance (and thus meet the insurance requirements) which is rejected the termination.
This double to pay contributions, or must pay risk quite. (Explanation: suddenly I have two private health insurance at the same time?) Is that possible?) The Karlsruhe Regional Court (AZ. 1 S 176 / 10) represents a different view now.