After major floods, the call gets louder that households should be more comprehensively protected against natural hazards.

Last year, the Bernd storm in the Ahr valley and on the Eifel made it clear that streams and rivers can become rushing waters with a high potential for damage.

The state justice ministers would like compulsory insurance against natural hazards that ensures private financial protection when a conventional residential building policy no longer applies - i.e. after heavy rain and floods, after damage from avalanches and landslides, after earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.

Philip Krohn

Editor in business, responsible for "People and Business".

  • Follow I follow

Federal Justice Minister Marco Buschmann made it clear after the Justice Ministers' Conference on Thursday that the federal states could introduce such a duty, but that it would not come through the federal government.

"In a time of extreme financial burdens on private households, we should keep our hands off everything that makes living in Germany even more expensive," he told the "Handelsblatt".

The obligation is probably constitutionally possible, but he considers it politically incorrect.

What is an elemental damage policy for?

It ensures that victims do not go away empty-handed in the above-mentioned cases if their house or inventory was damaged by natural hazards.

Heavy rain in particular is a phenomenon that is increasing with climate change, according to data and forecasts from the insurance industry, since there are smaller temperature differences in summer, which means that large amounts of water rain down more frequently in one place instead of being distributed as before.

Traditional household and residential building policies cover damage from fire, water damage, storm/hail and burglary.

Around 46 percent of households have a policy against heavy rain, landslides and other risks as an additional component.

A few years ago, this share was 30 percent.

An information campaign by the insurers has increased the insurance density, but not to such an extent that after a natural disaster like the one on the Ahr, the fundamental question would not be asked again and again as to whether there should be an obligation.

For which households is the additional protection worthwhile?

There is a simple rule of thumb in the insurance industry: the more exposed consumers are to a risk, the more expensive it is to protect against its occurrence.

The location of the house or apartment is decisive for the premiums for elementary or natural hazard insurance.

Insurers have classified the risk of being hit by a flood into four risk levels according to their Flood Risk and Environmental Risk Assessment (ZÜRS) Zoning System.

If you live in a region in level 4 with a probability of return of ten years, you pay more than in level 1, where the event statistically occurs in one in 200 years.

There are savings if the basement is prepared for such damage events and valuable household goods are on other floors.

Why is there no obligation?

Various groups are opposed to this: For them, regulatory reasons speak against an obligation.

Justice also plays a role.

Poorer households that are less exposed would have to stand up for those who build close to rivers and consciously expose themselves to the risk.

The FDP argues with the already high housing costs for households that the insurance industry would consider a selection option to be sensible.

Consumers would have to be asked about the protection options, but could vote against it.

What do consumer advocates advise?

They consider compulsory insurance to be politically necessary so that the state can no longer be blackmailed when poorly insured households have to be compensated.

At the individual level, the Federation of German Consumer Organizations advises taking a close look at the individual risk.

"Tenants and homeowners can often save themselves this additional protection, at least if they don't store valuable items in the basement but on the upper floors," she writes in an information brochure.

High inflation plays a part in these considerations.

If you want to optimize your insurance cover in order to save something, you should also critically question this coverage.

What criteria should insurance meet?

The rating agency Franke&Bornberg has established common criteria for the quality of protection for residential building and natural hazard policies.

Covers receive the highest rating when they include clean-up and demolition costs, moving and protection costs, drain pipes and water supply and heating pipes on the insured property, and surge damage.