We were asked by the school today about insurance covering our child. So I have just been finding out about the need to have private liability insurance here to cover all members of the family.
Searching through the forum I was amazed to find that there is no reference to it as a 'must have', but from what I can tell (Swiss sources) it is an essential purchase.
Does everyone on EF already have this essential insurance and therefore no one needs to ask about it? May be I'm the only one living recklessly....
Comparis have the cheapest option with Winterthur at about 190CHF per year combined with House Contents insurance for a family of 4. If any one knows of any better options or what to what out for when getting insured I am open to suggestions.
We have it. When we moved here everything like this was organised through a relocation service and this insurance wasn't mentioned as a suggestion but as an absolute necessity. At the time, and if I'm honest, since then, I've questioned how much we were ripped off by this, but your post makes me reconsider. We went with Zurich - we were straight off the boat and took the word of the relocation agent.
I checked the 'working and living in Switzerland' book, and it confirms the need for the insurance. I will have to sort this out pretty quick I guess, but with all the talk about health insurance I am surprised there isn't more about this.
You're lucky you had a relocation agent. One of the benefits of working and relocating for a MNC.
Private Liability Insurance likes to be combined with flat insurance. As a single cover costs ~ CHF 170.00 - CHF 210.00 yearly premium. Not all insurance companies in Switzerland have the conditions in English.
I've gotten quotes for over 400 CHF including both private liability and household insurance. Am I doing something wrong here? I don't know how to get the price to go down except decreasing the value of the furniture and taking off the "simple theft outside of home" option...I think that this might be the most useful though. (This price is for 2 people)
Hang on a second. Nobody else seems to have picked on this yet - but the book might say that you need this, but that is just the opinion of the author, not the law.
There is nothing (except fear, usually propagated by people who sell insurance) that compels you to have this insurance. You must have 3rd party liability insurance for your car, and minimum health insurance. That's it.
I made a personal decision not to have this insurance. I'm always being lectured by insurance salesmen about it, much like I'm always being hassled for my decision not to shell out for a half tax card for public transport.
Be careful - this is one of the most (over) insured countries in the world, select only insurance that makes real sense to you (weigh up the risks and the rewards and decide whether you can afford to pay something yourself if you break it), otherwise you might end up like many Swiss - totally over insured.
Be very careful about the contracts you sign for these types of insurances as well - they often lock you in for very long periods - like five or ten years and you can't get out of them very easily. This is one reason why I try to travel as light as possible when it comes to insurance, I'm just tired of studying the fine print and getting ripped off.
One area where myths are often propagated about this type of insurance is landlords that write into the contract that you must have this type of insurance. Landlords cannot compel you to do so. They are simply trying trying to shift the burden of something that is their responsibility to insure onto you. For example, if a tree branch fell in a storm and damaged part of the property they would ask you to claim this on your insurance, when it is in fact their responsibility. If you pay for things you break yourself (as is normal), then there is absolutely no reason for you to take additional insurances to cover such cases.
Surely this goes well beyond whether you can afford to pay for something if you break it. Public Liability extends to any claim that may be made against you for property damage or injury to the person. If, for example, you are careless with an umbrella and it goes into someones eye and they loose the sight of an eye as a result this could be a very substantial claim against you.
True, though what happens in other countries? Such generalised public liability insurance is pretty uncommon in many countries, yet surely the same risks exist? Why does it suddenly become a "must have" as soon as one steps foot in Germany or Switzerland?
Specifically in the case of Switzerland it's extremely difficult to sue people who have hurt you for negligence for things anyway, and even if successful the payouts are not exactly substantial.
In the case of an accident on the street, surely it would have to be shown that one party was negligent and that they owed a duty of care to the other? Sometimes accidents happen. If you'd taken all reasonable steps to be careful and something happened like an animal ran in front of you and you tripped and caused the accident, would you be financially liable? If you were poking the umbrella around and trying to cause harm, then your insurance wouldn't cover you anyway. What about when two people collide on a ski slope? Do they argue about who is at fault and who's insurance is going to pay? Or are the costs simply met by the accident insurance that everyone has through their health insurance / employer? Or in extreme cases the disability pension which covers everyone who works anyway?
What I'm trying to say here is that the risks are often overdone. Hopefully none of us will ever be in a situation where we are hurt by the negligence of a company or individual, because we might just find that we get left high and dry when it comes to the law, as happened to at least two people I know.
Do you personally know of any such "umbrella" type cases as you've described, or were these just hypothetical cases made by people who are justifying the reasons for such an insurance?
Here's another angle, based on the original posters original message.
The question was whether private liability insurance is necessary for a child, and was suggested by the school.
What happens if the kids are playing some sort of ball game and someone knocks a ball and it goes through the window in a school building? Is this a circumstance that would require the parents to pay up? What if they refused? Can children be held accountable for their own actions, or can the parents be made to pay for the damage? After all - kids are kids and accidents can happen.
Or would it be paid by the general insurance taken out by the school for such cases. What if the identity of the child is unknown is they deny the incident?
How are such cases handled in other cases (especially with regards to children at school) in other countries, and why is Switzerland any different? Surely the school is just trying to reduce their own insurance liability by transferring it onto the parents?
For those of you who grew up in other countries, did your parent insure you against any damage you might cause at school. Maybe you did cause some damage somewhere along the line and the school asked your parents to pay. What would have happened if your parents said "accidents happen, we aren't paying, claim on your own insurance"?
I got the liability and household insurance because I thought it was required by law. I would like to have my current one (started in December 2006) run out. Do I have to actively un-renew/cancel it (I don't know what the technical term for this is)?