A Flood of Paperwork,a Familiar Outcome

Dieter Körner,a sprightly 89-year-old,is just weeks away from his 90th birthday. Recently, he received a hefty 22-page letter from his pension insurance provider. The content? A confirmation that he is not entitled to a widow’s pension, a fact he has known as his wife’s passing 19 years ago. Körner is left wondering why the insurance company felt the need to re-calculate and re-inform him of this long-settled matter, especially after so much time has passed.

Körner recounts reading the document repeatedly, struggling to decipher its bureaucratic language. even a phone call to the pension insurance provider failed to clarify the purpose of the mailing. He states that he did not contest the original decision or request a re-evaluation after his wife’s death,with his last contact regarding contributions occurring shortly after her passing. Subsequent correspondence was limited to matters concerning his personal deposits.

The Reason Behind the Denial

The reason for Körner’s ineligibility for a widow’s pension lies in the sum of his own pensions. He receives both disability and old-age pensions, the combined amount of which exceeds the threshold for receiving additional benefits. Körner’s professional background is noteworthy; he worked with asbestos and as a model maker for Unterweser Modellbau, a company initially located in Rönnebeck, where he now resides in a senior living complex.his work involved constructing large-scale models of ships, aircraft, and industrial plants, and he even featured in a film and book showcasing his skills.

Service or Superfluousness?

While Körner expresses satisfaction with the amount he receives from his pension insurance, he is critical of their operational methods. He views the extensive bureaucracy involved in calculating a pensioner’s entitlement, only to reiterate a long-standing decision, as excessive. He jokes that the zeros and commas indicating his €0.00 widow’s pension entitlement practically fill an entire page. Körner speculates about the motivation behind the insurance company’s actions, suggesting that an employee indicated it was simply protocol.

Pension insurance Response: A Matter of “Service”

Björn Watermann, spokesperson for the pension insurance, offers a different perspective. He explains that it is standard practice for individuals to recieve updates when their claims are affected by legislative changes or adjustments. In Körner’s case, there were revisions in 2014 and 2019, but these did not alter his eligibility for a widow’s pension. Despite the lack of impact, the insurance company sent the letter to provide written confirmation of his status.

Watermann defends the action as a form of “service,” ensuring that Körner receives written confirmation of his long-standing status after numerous legal amendments. He acknowledges that the decision may not be immediately clear to an 89-year-old but argues that simplified language has limitations when maintaining legal compliance. Körner reports that the pension insurance employee informed him to expect further mailings.

This situation highlights a broader debate about bureaucratic efficiency and the balance between providing thorough information and avoiding unnecessary paperwork. According to a recent study by the German Federal Statistical Office, administrative costs account for a notable portion of pension fund expenditures, raising questions about resource allocation and the effectiveness of interaction strategies.

We strive to provide clarity and transparency in all our communications, even when the outcome remains unchanged.

Björn Watermann, Pension Insurance Spokesperson