Search Q&A
Is it normal that as an expat I was given no information about Mutuelles until I asked more about them?
As someone from the UK I was aware that in Belgium there exists something called Mutuelles and on searching and asking about them i was repeatedly told "they're basically private health care".
When i started my new job i was aware that I'd receive as a benefit Private Healthcare, which I assumed was this Mutuelle thing that everyone described as it fit the description.
I later found out that it's different and in addition to a Mutuelle and that during the months between when I'd first receive cover for this Private Healthcare that I'd also have a Mutuelle.
The strange part is that my Mutuelle when i set it up requested confirmation from my employer. Is this normal? Why do they need something from my employer? If it is normal, why did my employer not ask me for proof of a Mutuelle until i asked them explicitly? I had been there for 3 months, basically without cover.
In short, my understanding of Private Healthcare in the UK caused me to misunderstand how a Mutuelle works here (they're really not that much alike at all as someone would NEVER have two private healthcares as it'd be double the cost with no benefit) and meant i was without cover for 3 months.
What CM said is accurate: I did go see a GP a few times and they demanded nothing except payment which came from my own pocket. They did explain what a Mutuelle was in the same was as everyone else: "it's basically private health insurance". Given that I was awaiting enrollment in PHI from my employer I assumed that this was the Mutuelle, which I now know not to be the case.
Also it's enlightening to hear that it's astonishing that my company didn't explain this and CM may not believe me, but as someone with a condition that poses no problems when managed, delaying my access to proper medical care would never have been intentional as the results can be extremely serious and even, although rarely, fatal.
Pages