Avoid the £250 travel insurance trap

Former_MSE_Guy · 6 July 2009 at 4:53PM

This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

Avoid the £250 travel insurance trap

thelawnet · 7 July 2009 at 1:42AM

I don't see how this is any different from any of the other charges they have - I pay by credit card, they charge me 3%, I see the charge and so enter my debit card details instead. I want to bring luggage, but they will charge me, so I deselect that. I would like inflight meals, but they charge me, so I take it off and bring my own food. I don't want insurance, so I untick the box.

As ever with these misguided campaigns, the costs have to go up for everybody if the campaign succees. The reason lastminute.com can offer cheap holidays is because they are making money elsewhere.

It seems simple to me, the insurance cost is there clearly on the screen, it's on the invoice, you don't have to buy it, if it's cheap enough, you might go for it, if it's too expensive, don't bother.

Stephenbw · 7 July 2009 at 1:41PM

thelawnet wrote: »

I don't see how this is any different from any of the other charges they have - I pay by credit card, they charge me 3%, I see the charge and so enter my debit card details instead. I want to bring luggage, but they will charge me, so I deselect that. I would like inflight meals, but they charge me, so I take it off and bring my own food. I don't want insurance, so I untick the box.

As ever with these misguided campaigns, the costs have to go up for everybody if the campaign succees. The reason lastminute.com can offer cheap holidays is because they are making money elsewhere.

It seems simple to me, the insurance cost is there clearly on the screen, it's on the invoice, you don't have to buy it, if it's cheap enough, you might go for it, if it's too expensive, don't bother.

How can a campaign to allow people to 'opt in' rather than 'opt out' to an extra be misguided? And how is it fair to subsidise one group of consumers by ripping off another?

I consider myself to be an experienced internet user and have booked many holidays and fights online and even I have on many occasions missed the insurance box, seen the charge on the invoice, then had to go back to deselect it. I know that I have this option; some don't and have said to me that because insurance was included that they assumed it to be compulsory; just as many did when travel agents routinely included it.

But it isn't always possible to go back a step; I was booking a UK coach holiday last week and missed the insurance section until I saw on the payment page a charge of £32. This was for 1 person for one weeks holiday in Scotland :eek: There was no back button on the site and for 'security' the browsers back button was disabled. I closed the page and started again, the insurance option was not only well hidden but if it was deselected you had to insert the name of your insurer and the policy number. As I don't have an annual policy and buy my insurance after my holiday booking is confirmed it was difficult to continue with the booking. I decided not to book the holiday, but others may think that the only way to book it was to also have the included insurance.

P.S. Unless you were writing your reply from the comfort of your airline seat, then you would take luggage and take your own food, not 'bring' it

:mad:

thelawnet · 7 July 2009 at 4:45PM

Stephenbw wrote: »

How can a campaign to allow people to 'opt in' rather than 'opt out' to an extra be misguided? And how is it fair to subsidise one group of consumers by ripping off another?

I consider myself to be an experienced internet user and have booked many holidays and fights online and even I have on many occasions missed the insurance box, seen the charge on the invoice, then had to go back to deselect it. I know that I have this option; some don't and have said to me that because insurance was included that they assumed it to be compulsory; just as many did when travel agents routinely included it.

But it isn't always possible to go back a step; I was booking a UK coach holiday last week and missed the insurance section until I saw on the payment page a charge of £32. This was for 1 person for one weeks holiday in Scotland :eek: There was no back button on the site and for 'security' the browsers back button was disabled. I closed the page and started again, the insurance option was not only well hidden but if it was deselected you had to insert the name of your insurer and the policy number. As I don't have an annual policy and buy my insurance after my holiday booking is confirmed it was difficult to continue with the booking. I decided not to book the holiday, but others may think that the only way to book it was to also have the included insurance.

P.S. Unless you were writing your reply from the comfort of your airline seat, then you would take luggage and take your own food, not 'bring' it :mad:

Fascinating. On a related point, it is "the browser's back button", not "the browsers back button". There is one browser, it has a back button. It is also "one week's holiday", rather than "one weeks holiday".

:mad:

Stephenbw · 7 July 2009 at 7:10PM

thelawnet wrote: »

Fascinating. On a related point, it is "the browser's back button", not "the browsers back button". There is one browser, it has a back button. It is also "one week's holiday", rather than "one weeks holiday". :mad:

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Thanks; I do sometimes forget my apostrophes, but I make an effort to use the correct words

:D

'Bring' and 'take' used incorrectly set my teeth on edge, and, although their incorrect usage is far more prevalent in the USA it is on the increase in the UK due to the popularity of shows such as 'Friends' where they invariably said 'bring' when they meant 'take'.

There are a number websites devoted to the problem.

rudekid48 · 7 July 2009 at 9:38PM

Stephenbw wrote: »

P.S. Unless you were writing your reply from the comfort of your airline seat, then you would take luggage and take your own food, not 'bring' it :mad:

Now, since we are having a grammatical spat, I feel that I must take you to task over your disgusting misuse of the smileys (or is it smiley's?).

Just what does "

:mad: " mean exactly? Wink and Mad. Now I don't know about you, but I cannot ever recall feeling the urge to wink when I am angry or distressed. As far as I am aware, most people that do wink when they are angry or distressed tend to be insane.

So is this your way of telling the MSE world that you are insane? Are you showing any other symptoms - hairy palms, sticky-up hair, slightly angled teeth or an obsession with punctuation?

Do we have any Drs (Dr's?) out there that could give a professional opinion? :xmassign::easter:

Stephenbw · 8 July 2009 at 1:56AM

I couldn't find a suitable smiley to show that I was only half joking i.e. although it wasn't intended as a personal attack

the general misuse of 'bring' for 'take' do make me mad :mad:

To answer your other question I would use 'smilies' as the plural of 'smiley' :snow_laug:snow_laug

MONDYMAN_3 · 8 July 2009 at 11:27AM

LOL you2charactersjustmademymorning

Avoid the £250 travel insurance trap

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free