Travel insurance claim - not lived with partner for 6 months

gordikin

schnide wrote: »

By your logic, if I call up Axa and ask them if I can make a claim on being unable to travel to Saturn because I forgot where I put my left foot last Hogglesday, they will not say:

1) "No."

2) "Yes you can make a claim, but it will be rejected."

3) "Yes you can make a claim, but check your policy to see if it is likely to be valid."

4) or even "Only if you were journeying to one of Saturn's moons."

..but they will just in fact say:

5) "Yes."

..in exactly the same way they did to me. Correct?

f I have my car stolen and phone my Insurance company and ask if I can make a claim and they say yes, does it mean they have to pay out when I subsequently disclose in writing that I left it with the keys in the ignition and the engine running?

schnide

lisyloo wrote: »

I was trying to offer you (and others reading) some helpful advice for the future, not score points on technicalities.

Yes I know, I was genuinely thanking you for:

Technically they should have given a disclaimer
e.g. said something along the lines of "In principle yes you can claim, but I have not at this stage checked your claim for eligibility, fraud etc, and you could later be turned down on the basis of something not apparent to me now".

A caller could, potentially, have been a fraudster with a fake Tamiflu box. Fortunately, I am not a fraudster and nor have I ever been. The details I gave at the time, both those volunteered and in response to the questions asked, were 100% genuine and I made a decision based on the answer recieved in equal faith.

I am not proposing they would then have to withdraw all phone services. What I am suggesting is that they do not say 'yes' when it does not mean 'yes'.

Sorry if you don't like the answer but to most of us it's blatantly obvvious

We will have to see, I will take this advice on board and I thank you for your help.

schnide

gordikin wrote: »

f I have my car stolen and phone my Insurance company and ask if I can make a claim and they say yes, does it mean they have to pay out when I subsequently disclose in writing that I left it with the keys in the ignition and the engine running?

You didn't answer my question, except with another question.

If the operative asked you if you left your keys in the ignition and the engine running and you said 'no' because you hadn't, they then explicitly said you would get your money back as long as you gave a crime reference number, and you submitted the claim with one only to be told there was a clause where your engine had to be made before 2003, which it wasn't, and they didn't pay out, would you think that fair?

To which you'd probably want to say yes because you'd read your policy. But then if you knew to read your policy, you wouldn't have needed to ask on the phone, nor trust their words if you did.

lisyloo

It really does depend on whether they were giving you an "indicative" answer based on partial information or whether it was a complete and full answer based on all the facts.

and I do agree with you that this should be made clear (without the full transcript we don't know whether it was or it wasn't).

Personally I do not think it wise to spend a large amount of money with no proof of the answer.
Let suppose they are an unscrupulous company, they can just say your call wasn't recorded or the equipment wasn't working that day.
You haven't given yourself any protection.
I would want it in writing before spending that amount of money and would advise you get some proof one way or another (a recorded phone call without their permission is not legally admissable).

dmg24

schnide, are you incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions/ omissions?

dmg24

schnide wrote: »

To which you'd probably want to say yes because you'd read your policy. But then if you knew to read your policy, you wouldn't have needed to ask on the phone, nor trust their words if you did.

Is it not common sense to read your policy? Do you always enter into contracts without reading them first?

*MF*

schnide wrote: »

I booked a trip to Norway for my girlfriend's 30th, due to leave 12th December. This cost several thousand pounds. On 7th December she was diagnosed with suspected swine flu and told not to travel.

@OP .. the following comments designed to help.

In my earlier post, I said "you not having read the policy" was likely to be an issue.

However, should we expect that the member of staff of the Insurer had or had NOT read the policy and was aware of its terms and conditions - if we place that responsibility on you then surely it applies no less to the staff member?

I used the extract from your opening post to indicate what perhaps was the minimum that you would have said when you phoned (yep, I am sure it was more).

Now, a staff member of an Insurer who has adequate knowledge of their Company's cover, terms and conditions - should in my opinion have immediately picked up on your use of "girlfriend" - not spouse, not partner - but girlfriend - because reasonably accurate knowledge of the policy terms and conditions would indicate that there was a need to clarify - exactly what is now giving rise to your problem. How long was she your girlfriend, how long had you been living together, etc etc.

It is only my opinion, and in outline that is how I would argue the case, were it me.

Again, it is only my opinion, but I think you lessen your chances the way you are presenting what happened as "I asked if I could claim, I was told yes, and now I find out they won't pay on a technicality they never mentioned".

Remember, "Can I make a claim?" is in many ways identical to "Can I apply for a credit card?" The immediate answer may be yes, the result may still be no claim payment and no credit card.

It's just opinions, but hope this helps ...

schnide

lisyloo wrote: »

It really does depend on whether they were giving you an "indicative" answer based on partial information or whether it was a complete and full answer based on all the facts.

and I do agree with you that this should be made clear (without the full transcript we don't know whether it was or it wasn't).

Personally I do not think it wise to spend a large amount of money with no proof of the answer.
Let suppose they are an unscrupulous company, they can just say your call wasn't recorded or the equipment wasn't working that day.
You haven't given yourself any protection.
I would want it in writing before spending that amount of money and would advise you get some proof one way or another (a recorded phone call without their permission is not legally admissable).

I do not disagree with anything you've said, and thank you again for your advice.

schnide

dmg24 wrote: »

schnide, are you incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions/ omissions?

I'm very capable of that and I will live within the consequences. I also therefore expect Axa to do the same with theirs.

gordikin

You said in post #19

I asked them if I could get the money back and they said 'yes'.

could means all of these:-

might
possibly will
may well
may possibly
may perhaps