The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Will elemental protection soon become significantly more expensive? These options remain

2024-02-15T05:30:17.332Z

Highlights: Will elemental protection soon become significantly more expensive? These options remain. There are differing opinions on the question of whether compulsory insurance can make sense in Germany. Experts recommend a mix of compulsory state insurance and private insurance. Elemental protection – can compulsory insurance make sense? It could mean protecting an existence of damage should an event occur, says Werner Schirmer, senior investment analyst at the Landesbank Baden-Württemberg Research (LBBW) In 2021, the flood in the Ahr Valley led to insurance losses of over eight million euros.



As of: February 15, 2024, 6:14 a.m

By: Fabian Hartmann

Comments

Press

Split

In the United States, home insurance has become unaffordable for many.

Are there also going to be higher insurance costs in this country due to climate change?

Kassel - In 2021, the flood in the Ahr Valley led to insurance losses of over eight million euros.

And last year, extreme weather events such as storms, hail or floods led to insurance losses amounting to around 4.9 billion euros nationwide.

In view of climate change, it can be assumed that events could occur again and again in the coming years.

Nevertheless, only around 54 percent of all residential buildings in this country are protected by natural hazard insurance - however, according to the General Association of the German Insurance Industry (GDV), 99 percent of all residential buildings could be insured.

With a view to the insurance situation in the USA, experts are now warning that we should prepare for the consequences of climate change early enough.

Home insurance there has now become unaffordable for many due to significantly more severe storm damage in the recent past. 

And although Germany is still a long way from situations like these, according to insurers, too little is happening from a political perspective.

“We will not be able to solve the challenges of climate change alone,” Handelsblatt

recently quoted

GDV President Norbert Rollinger’s words during the annual media conference in January.

Fear of more expensive home insurance is growing - GDV calls for adaptation to climate change

If more is not finally done to adapt to the consequences of climate change, then residential building insurance premiums could double within the next ten years, warns the GDV.

At some point the insurance industry will reach its limits.

As a result, calls for government support are growing louder.

Unlike in parts of the USA, insurers in this country would have the opportunity to calculate and offer risk-adequate premiums, explained Matthias Trüstedt, head of products and pricing at Allianz Versicherung, to the

Handelsblatt.

This would enable comprehensive insurability.

Insurers consider the risk that homeowners in Germany will not be able to find insurance to be low.

Even in areas in the so-called ZÜRS zone four, which, according to statistics, is particularly frequently affected by floods once every ten years.

At the Federal Association of Consumer Organizations (vzbv), however, things are seen differently.

In a position paper from August 2021, the vzbv calls for natural hazard insurance to become affordable for all consumers.

In November 2021, the vzbv supported its demand with a key points paper.

In it he calls for compulsory private insurance with limited state coverage and shows how compulsory insurance could be made fair.

Experts recommend a mix of compulsory state insurance and private insurance

In addition, some insurers criticize the fact that in many cases nothing has changed in terms of land use and building planning.

The GDV complains that people are still planning and building as if climate change and its consequences did not exist.

Against the background of possible increasing insurance losses in the future as a result of climate change, a study by the Landesbank Baden-Württemberg Research (LBBW) has now called for a rethinking of the structure of natural hazard protection, reports the financial magazine

ProContra

.

My news

  • Miele, Porsche & Co: Companies are leaving Germany – “Not even the financial crisis was that serious” read

  • “Citizen money is a crime against our children” – Hard traffic light billing

  • Well-known luxury company is insolvent: branches in Germany affected after bankruptcy read

  • Setback for Germany: Next company withdraws from its homeland read

  • Next bankruptcy in the fashion industry: shoe retailer from southern Germany is insolvent

  • Traditional company in Baden-Württemberg insolvent?

    Around 400 employees would be affected

The study authors generally recommend a mixed system of state compulsory natural hazard insurance and private insurance.

LBBW's proposals range from EU-wide protection against natural disasters to national public-private partnerships and compulsory insurance against natural disasters. 

“Outside the social security system, compulsory insurance is rare in Germany,” said Werner Schirmer, who, as a senior investment analyst, is largely responsible for the study at LBBW.

Any form of compulsory insurance restricts the individual's right to freedom of contract.

“At the same time, compulsory natural hazard insurance for building owners could mean protecting their existence should an event of damage occur,” explained Schirmer.

Elemental protection – can compulsory insurance make sense?

There are differing opinions on the question of whether compulsory insurance can make sense in the event of natural hazards.

Although some federal states, including North Rhine-Westphalia and Baden-Württemberg, have spoken out in favor of it, other bodies, including the Federal Ministry of Justice, have so far opposed it.

According to the Handelsblatt

, insurers are also

rather skeptical about compulsory insurance.

Flooding Lower Saxony © IMAGO/Rainer Droese

Nevertheless, the GDV plans to introduce a public-private partnership with a so-called stop-loss regulation for extreme natural disasters.

According to the regulation, the insurers would initially be responsible.

However, above a certain damage limit, the state would cover the costs.

The GDV sees a damage volume of around 30 billion euros as a realistic limit.

GDV association head Asmussen: “Only prevention prevents damage or reduces its extent”

For Jörg Asmussen, General Manager of GDV, such constructs are more of a long-term solution.

However, he does not believe that a timely implementation from the political side is realistic, he said,

according to the

Handelsblatt

last.

What is necessary, however, is a rethink by states and municipalities in area and building planning and prevention, as the GDV had already called for at a press conference at the beginning of the year.

The insurers' demands ranged from a halt to construction of buildings in designated danger areas, to anchoring prevention and adaptation to climate change in state building regulations, to a nationwide natural hazards portal that clearly identifies the danger situations.

“Only prevention prevents damage or reduces its extent.

Compulsory insurance alone does not solve a single problem,” emphasizes Asmussen. 

(Fabian Hartmann)

Source: merkur

All news articles on 2024-02-15

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.