What actually meets CSI standard?

Ok, the best, clearest definition that I've found in any government website is that CSI insurance should cover a majority of expenses one could expect to incur.

So I have a catastrophic insurance plan (Anthem) as a retirement perk. It has a 2,300 pound deductible and then covers 80% of literally everything else, no limit. Once out-of-pocket costs hit about $6,000, it pays at 100%.  SO, if I was seriously ill, it's an acceptable (though not stellar or even good) plan and more than meets the "majority" wording. For day-to-day, it's not at all useful.

As an older person with a pre-existing condition, getting health insurance on the private market is out of the question in the USA - the cost would run into over $1,000 per month.  I've gotten a quote from Vitality here in the UK for about 73 pounds a month, with a 500 pound excess. Doing the math, that will cost me just under $100 a month, and will allow me a private video GP and minor testing fully covered. More than that would be hit with the 500 pound excess.

I'm on the fence as to purchasing the additional private insurance, but am thinking that perhaps I should to cover all the CSI bases. I can private pay the 2300 pounds excess on the Anthem plan if it came to that. I can certainly manage the 500 pound Vitality excess. 

My big concern is that when we trot my Anthem coverage in front of the UK government when Daughter (if it is allowable after Brexit) wants to apply for leave to remain/citizenship they will say it was not adequate as CSI and disqualify her.

She now has a full UK CSI policy that I think will cover her completely, but the rules are such that since she's my dependent  I've got to have CSI as a self-sufficient qualified person. My having insurance that they at some point declare inadequate would shoot her down. So,  I'm wondering if having a comprehensive policy with a really high deductible would still meet the requirement of having CSI?

Does anyone have any really concrete info on this? (Not just conjecture, please.) It is a comprehensive plan - it has to cover all conditions, including pre-existing, with no limits. It just has that wonking big deductible. I can imagine a paper-pusher splitting hairs - "Just because you an afford to pay the deductible doesn't mean that you would pay the deductible and thus the coverage doesn't meet CSI requirements. Out you go!"

Plan B is to register as a jobseeker, I guess? And hope I can get enough of a part-time job to meet the minimum requirements. (If HMRC says I cannot accept my telecommuting offer.)

My big concern is that when we trot my Anthem coverage in front of the UK government when Daughter (if it is allowable after Brexit) wants to apply for leave to remain/citizenship they will say it was not adequate as CSI and disqualify her.

Leave to Remain and ILR are UK immigration rules and are nothing to do with those who use EU laws and EU court rulings to be in the UK. Your daughter would have had to use EU rules and apply for a PRC and not ILR as she would not qualify for ILR. But as you know, the UK is leaving the EU by March 2019 and it is unlikely there will still be EU rules in 6 years time, which is the minimum time needed to apply for British citizenship.

I don't think it is worth worrying about using EU free movement rules in 5 or 6 years times, when they most likely won't be there then. You have your link for texts, so that EEA citizens and non-EEA citizens using EU rules/EU court rulings can keep up to date if they won't get British citizineship before Brexit.

A bit a background why the CSI requirement is so vague and why you won’t get a definite answer -

The CSI that the 2004 Directive stated that students, self sufficients, and all their family members must have to be legally in another member state as a qualified person, was never defined. These people can't use that member states health service as a citizen can, meaning they only have to show they have a CSI to be legally on that country under EU rules. If that doesn't cover them fully for healthcare, then they have to pay the difference themselves as that member state won't pay for them.

EEA citizens who retire to another EEA country, have all their health bills paid for by their own EEA country, under the EUs S1 agreement. They get an S1 from their own EEA country and then present that when they want health care in the EEA country they retired to. That EEA country then claims all those health costs back from their own country, via the S1. If they can't get an S1, then they need to pay for all their own health bills in the EEA country they retired to as that country won't pay for them. These retirees come under the self sufficient part of the Directive

Allowing non-EUs family members to use free movement to the EU,  came in after this 2004 Directive and only came in because of a European Court of Justice ruling in 2008.

As I said before, the UK still gave free NHS because anyone legally residing in the UK, could use the NHS  for free, but they and their family members are still required to have a CSI to be legally in the UK (a self sufficient qualified person or student qualified person) as per the EU Directive on the free movement of people. The UK gave transition for this and enforced the CSI Directive requirement from about 2010.

On 6 April 2015, the UK ended the 'free NHS for all legally residing in the UK' by changing the definition or "ordinary resident" for bill free use of the NHS, under the Immigration Act 2014. If you read that Act, it changed the definition of "ordinary resident"   to mean a  British Citizen or someone with a valid ILR (Indefinite Leave to remain - which is gained via UK immigration rules).
 
At the same time the UK linked free healthcare provided by the UK, to those who have a UK state pension. Those who retired to another EU country could now only have an S1 if they are in receipt of a UK state pension.  Suddenly, all the others can no longer have a UK S1 and must now take out private insurance (as under the Directive, that EEA country won't pay for them either). They also changed the UK state pension so that this is now only given based  on our own contributions to the UK.

At present, the UK is still allowing self sufficient qualified person and student qualified persons, and all their family members, to use the NHS as a Brit who is residing in the UK. This is why a CSI is vague, as the UK doesn't have to do this and could end it.

You can either read other forums and see what they used for a CSI and had their RCs and DCPRs approved on, or apply for your RCs with you as the self sufficient qualified person, with CSIs for you both, and see if UKVI agree they are CSIs.

Plan B is to register as a jobseeker, I guess?

Just be careful with this as the UK has really clamped down on those claming they were a job seeking qualified person, because of all the abuse.

The idea is that you can move to another EEA country to look for work and if you can’t find any work or you lose that job, then you can move to another EEA country and look for work. You can't just move to an EEA country of your choosing and remain there by keep claiming that you are still looking for work. That comes under the 'must not be an undue burden to that member state' part of EU rules.

You need absolute proof that you were a jobseeker to use jobseeker qualified persons and also prove  that you were qualified to get the jobs you were applying for. Those on JSA are required to look for work for at least 35 hours a week now, so that is the level you also need to prove.

Most importantly, part of the UK clampdown on abuse from EEA citizens staying in the UK and claiming they were looking for work, is that the UK now only allows these EEA citizen jobseekers 91 days over the entire 5 years needed to get a DCPR. And that 91 days includes that 3 months from when you first entered the county and were allowed to be in the UK for that 3 months without being a qualified person.

The UK brought this in under the recent EEA Reg changes in November 2016 and February 2017 and judging by all the posts on refusals of a DCPR (for EEA citizens) and PRC (for non-EEA citizens in the UK on EU routes) they are applying it retrospectively, as allowed under EU law.

I'm not even sure you will be allowed to sign on at a job centre amd you would have to ask. You haven't contributed to the UK in the last two relevant tax years and the UK has brought in the Welfare Reforms Act and new EEA rules for what benefits EEA jobseekers can claim from the UK. If you had contributed to the UK, then you could have claimed contribution based JSA for up to 6 minths, but would still have to do what other JSA claimants are now required to do.

As you haven't contributed to the UK, it will be  income based jobseekers (where you get a NI stamp even if you have too much income to receive any money). But there was a three month wait for this for those entereing the UK and it is a two year wait under the Welfare Reform Act, when 6 income based benefits are being replaced by a new benefit called Universal Credit. UC also has a cut-off and most likely you will have too much income/savings to claim the jobseeking part of UC anyway. UC seems to be in in most areas in part now for jobseekers and is getting rolled out in full from this year.

Trying to claim to be a jobseeking qualified person in the UK now, is not easy. As you have the funds and the CSIs, being a self sufficient qualified person is much easier to prove that you and your family member has a right to reside in the UK under EU rules.  Many of those who have not been legally in the UK under EU rules (as they thought the UK would stay in the EU) are now wishing that they had remained legal and brought CSIs, instead of trying to save themselves money.

Ok, as in register for looking for work and looking for work. I don't give a hoot about claiming any benefits for being a jobseeker.     It would be a serious job search, if I go about it at all. I have some connections at local universities, and may hit them up with a CV to see if there's anything they know of.  I just don't think I'm up to working full time at an administrative-level position similar to the one I just left.  Something mindless and low stress would be fine.

Back to the CSI, which is the main issue of the post - Yes, I know the history. I also know that as someone living in Scotland (per email directly from their government policy wonk) who intends to make it their home I can use the NHS. That's not the issue here.  The issue is the large deductible v eligible CSI plan.

I've been snooping all over the internet for weeks, all the boards I could find, and am not seeing anything recent about anyone getting their RCs with a CSI with a deductible in the 4 figures.  There were some from back around the turn of the decade, but that's a long time ago. I do have a Flexible Spending Account that's good until next spring that has enough to cover about half of that excess, so I can always put that paperwork in the packet when we apply, with the CSI info, I guess.

I am not about to send in an application that could flag my daughter as being not eligible to be in the country just to see if it would work, thanks.  I'm really trying to find anyone who has recently either heard of (seriously) someone with that situation getting a RC or who has gotten their RC using CSI with a 2500 pound excess.   The Daughter needs a RC.  I don't, not really. So the sticking point is to not put her in any danger of being tossed out of the UK because ~I~ am not in compliance with EU regs by having a large excess on the policy.

If I can't get any solid info in the next month I can always purchase the UK policy, I guess.  But at a thousand pounds a year that wasn't in my original budget I'd sure like to not do so if there's a way around it that will not put my daughter in a bind.

Thanks anyway, all.

As to 5 years down the road, who knows. But I'd bet that whatever options there are for us, CSI will be lurking at that point, too.

Ok, as in register for looking for work and looking for work. I don't give a hoot about claiming any benefits for being a jobseeker.   

You wouldn't get them, as I said in my very long posts    But signing on means you have proof you are a jobseeker as the DWP staff check this, instead of you having to trying to prove to UKVI that you were a jobseeker qualified person. If you are allowed to sign on with the welfare and EEA changes,  you would have to ask. But you are still down to that 91 days max, from the day you entered.

But the bigger problem is an member state being able to change the rules for these jobseekers easily as the UK have just done, with the 91 days only, and applied it to everyone.

It's much easier to be a self sufficient, student or worker qualified person as these are so easy to prove. I gave you the link to what the UK says these are.

I am not about to send in an application that could flag my daughter as being not eligible to be in the country just to see if it would work, thanks. 

Don't worry, that's not how it works for those on EU routes in another member state. If you are not a qualified person, then start being one, any one of them. An EEA citizen worker under EU rules, only has to be part time.

You are over thinking this. You don't even need those RCs to be in the UK as a qualified person as you have your daughter as your Direct Family Member, not an extended family member.

The RCs are just to help with the university your daughter is at, NHS, employment etc. As long as you make sure you are a qualified person, then your direct family member is allowed to be in that member state too. If you stop being a QP, then become one again. It's extended family members that must be granted an RC to be in that country as they have no automatic right under EU laws.


If they refuse your RCs as they don't agree they are CSIs, then just get the CSIs that others have got and apply again. Or by then, you might have a job and can be a worker qualified person.

They aren't going to throw your daughter out. All that will happen is that her 5 years to the EUs PR route will have either not have started yet or reset to zero  - which is no biggie anyway as you have only just arrived in the UK and EU laws are ending in the UK long before she would reach her 5 years for the EUs PR, and even PR is EU rules. All you need to do is become a qualified peson and remain one, any one of them.

After having a look around too, all ll I can find it that each CSI will be judged on it's own merits.

And a general guide that says -


The following is not acceptable as evidence of comprehensive sickness insurance:

    a health cash-plan scheme will not be considered, as these policies do not cover medical treatment in the majority of circumstances;
    reliance on the UK NHS (national health service); and
    travel insurance, as these temporary policies only cover emergency treatment for a limited time, outside of your country of residence.

To meet the requirement to hold comprehensive sickness insurance on the basis of a private insurance policy, you must hold a policy which provides cover for medical treatment in the majority of circumstances.

Although this was in an archieved document.

And a test cases in court where they tried to claim that using the UK's NHS was their CSI, and they lost.

In the UK, it is a try it and see.

As I said, CSI isn't a problem in other EEA countries as it seems that anything that isn't covered by that persons Comprehensive Sickness Insurance, is paid for by the CSI holder. A lot of EU countries have an insurance based health system anyway and charge extra for other things like a visit to the doctors and A&E, prescriptions etc

Just color me paranoid. In my former employment I used to also deal with getting people visas/PR etc. and am trained that ICE is completely unforgiving. Hard for that to not bleed over to our current situation!

I did find a decent policy for me for about $100, with a $400 deductible, so I'm holding that in reserve. Have an appointment tomorrow afternoon to get a NI number - requires that I travel all the way across town (still trying to figure out the buses to get there) for an interview. After that point I assume if I find a job I would be able to work - with "if" being the important word there. Am hoping my USA immigration work experience might be useful.... or not. I really should try to find something that doesn't require I have a lot of contact with the  general public as I still cannot understand what they are saying half the time.

 Have an appointment tomorrow afternoon to get a NI number - requires that I travel all the way across town (still trying to figure out the buses to get there) for an interview. After that point I assume if I find a job I would be able to work - with "if" being the important word there.

You don't need a national insurance number in order to be able to start working. All it would mean would be that you would be taxed at a higher rate until you got yours through, you'd get that extra tax back. 

Yeah, I've been told that  employers prefer you to have it at the time they hire you, though, so I might as well have it taken care of. Fortunately it just looks like a bus trip on the same bus, and we can stop off in city center on the way back and do some shopping, so might as well get it.

Yeah, I've been told that  employers prefer you to have it at the time they hire you, though, so I might as well have it taken care of. Fortunately it just looks like a bus trip on the same bus, and we can stop off in city center on the way back and do some shopping, so might as well get it.

Yes, absolutely! Enjoy your day! 

Now have a national insurance number, have applied for a few jobs. Will be interesting to see how this goes.

On the CSI, we found a company called Vitality Health. It appears to be relatively comprehensive, although it won't pay for organ transplants and pre-existing conditions.  I've bought a plan with zero excess for my daughter for just over 50 pounds a month, and am getting one for myself just because I don't want to have to deal with the massive excess and co-pay on my Anthem Blue Cross plan.  We have most of the paperwork to apply for the residency certificate for me and the residency card for her, and should be sending things in soon.  I guess we'll find out if they consider Vitality to be enough, then....