Mis-sold travel insurance? Insure&Go / travelinsurance.co.uk

weirdbeardmt

Hi folks, interested in thoughts on this please!

I live in the Channel Islands. I had travel insurance from Insure & Go (via travelinsurance.co.uk). The policy was annual multi-trip.

I tried to make a claim last year when the flight I had back from the USA was delayed, which meant I missed my connecting flight from London to the Channel Islands.

I tried to claim under missed departure, and despite a huge amount of back and forth they continued to deny the claim and wouldn't pay out.

Part of their argument, though, was that trips "within the UK" were not covered. So they were saying that my flight from London to Channel Islands was not covered. However, the Channel Islands are not within the UK.

My question is, then, is did they mis-sell me the policy? The cover did state that it included the Channel Islands, but for them to not cover flights to and from Channel Islands to the UK is obviously suspect as I have no other choice if I actually want to go away. Their definition of UK includes Channel Islands, which is clearly wrong but I wonder if they have the right/power to make whatever definitions they want?

Their main reason for denying the claim was that missed departure only included the start of outward or inward part of the journey. So they're saying that the outward journey was US -> London, and that my connection London -> CI was therefore not the start of my journey. With hindsight, I should have split the trips in to separate journeys, but they would have wanted evidence of the delay that caused me to miss the flight to the CI, so they probably would have put 2 + 2 together.

Any thoughts on this? Does anyone else have bad experience with this company?

Thanks.

dacouch

I don't think they miss sold you the policy unless you specifically asked about connecting flights.

I picked up a customer who had exactly the same problem eg missed a connecting flight to her home in the Channel Islands. I placed her with Fortis (Now Aegis) as they did not have the connecting flights within the UK exclusion (The vast vast majority of Insurers exclude it). I'm not sure if they still do not exclude it. (It was subject ton the flight being delayed for specific reasons eg storms etc

For the future, it would be worth you buying cover through a broker in the Channel Islands who will be familiar with the unusual requirements of connecting flights.

huckster

If Insure & Go have dealt with the policy in accordance with the policy terms and conditions, then I can't see that their decision is wrong.I have just checked a policy wording from I&G and it states that the CI are not part of the UK, so your post confuses me. Something to take up with I&G if your policy states something different.

The best thing to do in these circumstances, if you feel that they have acted unfairly, is to make a formal complaint in writing to them. If you cannot resolve, then pass it to the FOS. If you go to the FOS, they will be charged a case fee of £500 and it will cost you nothing.

Which of their policies did you take out ? Budget, silver, gold. This will help understand their decision against the cover they offer in their wording.

weirdbeardmt

Thanks both...

dacouch wrote: »

For the future, it would be worth you buying cover through a broker in the Channel Islands who will be familiar with the unusual requirements of connecting flights.

This is certainly something I'll likely be doing, only issue is that cover tends to be considerably (> £100) more than other cover. (Of course other cover that doesn't pay out is useless though!)

huckster wrote: »

If Insure & Go have dealt with the policy in accordance with the policy terms and conditions, then I can't see that their decision is wrong.I have just checked a policy wording from I&G and it states that the CI are not part of the UK, so your post confuses me. Something to take up with I&G if your policy states something different.

The issue was that the terms were vague, i.e., they didn't have specific wording for the issue that occurred. The confusion over location of CI was actually in a letter they sent me - part of their rebuttal. I've just rechecked the policy document that I have and there's actually a specific section entitled "Returning early to the UK, NI, CI, IoM or RoI". So actually this clearly indicates that CI (and travel to/from) is included.

The best thing to do in these circumstances, if you feel that they have acted unfairly, is to make a formal complaint in writing to them.

Tried this, repeatedly. They just advised me to go to the regulator.

If you cannot resolve, then pass it to the FOS. If you go to the FOS, they will be charged a case fee of £500 and it will cost you nothing.

I should do this. Only issue is that this all kicked off a while ago and after so much agro I lost interest (i.e., let them win). I still have all the paperwork etc. The trip was end of 2009 and the correspondence continued through the early months of 2010. Is it too late?

Which of their policies did you take out ? Budget, silver, gold. This will help understand their decision against the cover they offer in their wording.

Annual Silver (Worldwide inc USA & Canada)

huckster

Having looked at the policy wording, I think your missed departure claim appears to be ok (providing the missed departure reason is covered under wording and you have proof). So yes I think you should make the complaint to the FOS and see what happens.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumer/complaints.htm

The trip was CI to US and US to CI. They can't separate out the Lon to CI bit as being a separate trip, to decline the claim as being in the same home area. The policy wording does not appear to allow this, unless I have missed something.

Whenever, I have dealt with complicated complaints, I have highlighted areas within the policy and given exact reasons to back a decision. If they have not done this, then I am not sure they believe in their own decision or have not communicated it properly.

weirdbeardmt

huckster wrote: »

Having looked at the policy wording, I think your missed departure claim appears to be ok (providing the missed departure reason is covered under wording and you have proof).

The wording for cause of missed departure includes "use of public transport to arrive at your departure point". In this case the transport was the flight from US-> Lon and I have written proof from American Airlines that they had a fault which caused the delay.

So yes I think you should make the complaint to the FOS and see what happens.

Even though it's been a year since the claim was initially made?

The trip was CI to US and US to CI. They can't separate out the Lon to CI bit as being a separate trip, to decline the claim as being in the same home area. The policy wording does not appear to allow this, unless I have missed something.

Herein lies the confusion. They've said that the missed departure cover only covers missing the initial departure (in this case, departure from the US.) So they're saying the departure (albeit part of a single trip) from Lon -> CI was NOT the start of the departure. This is the route I initially took and where they turned it down.

The alternative way to look at it is to treat it as two separate trips. i.e., US-> Lon and Lon-> CI. It's a bit tenuous because they're *obviously* part of a single trip, but I think the fact that they were separate airlines and there was also a transfer from Heathrow to Gatwick, it's conceivably arguable. In this case, I think the cover should have covered it. But it's not how I originally phrased the claim.

Whenever, I have dealt with complicated complaints, I have highlighted areas within the policy and given exact reasons to back a decision. If they have not done this, then I am not sure they believe in their own decision or have not communicated it properly.

Yes, we did this... but again it comes down to interpretation. The wording is sufficiently vague to not settle the issue.

What's especially annoying is that when I finally departed the US, I knew I was going to miss the flight from Gatwick, and spent a small fortune using the satellite phone to try and rebook my connecting flight. This was to no avail. What I'm claiming for is the cost of the new flight from Gatwick-> CI and preferably the cost of those calls.

I suppose if it costs them £500 for FOS to open a case, and the claim is only for £250 odd, then maybe they'd just settle it?

dacouch

Huckster this is what they rely on to deny the claim eg the missed departure for the internal connecting flight

Section G - Missed departure
This section does not apply for trips in your home area, England,
Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.

Definition of Home Area being

Home Area
The area you normally live in which in accordance with our
eligibility requirements (see page 2) would need to be within the
UK, the Channel Islands or the Republic of Ireland (Please note
that for the purpose of this insurance each of these areas is
defined as a separate area of residence)

weirdbeardmt

dacouch wrote: »

Definition of Home Area being

Home Area
The area you normally live in which in accordance with our
eligibility requirements (see page 2) would need to be within the
UK, the Channel Islands or the Republic of Ireland (Please note
that for the purpose of this insurance each of these areas is
defined as a separate area of residence)

So is the interpretation then that the UK and CI form a single home area...? Because that last sentence in my mind implies that the UK and CI are separate areas, and therefore the trip from Lon->CI would not be within the home area and the claim should be valid?

huckster

"We will pay up to the amount shown in the table of benefits for
the extra reasonable costs of travel and accommodation you
need to continue your trip if you cannot reach the original
departure point of your trip on the outward or final return
journey. As a result of public-transport services failing (due to
poor weather conditions, a strike, industrial action or a
mechanical breakdown) or the vehicle you are travelling in being
involved in an accident or having a mechanical breakdown. (This
would not include your vehicle running out of petrol, oil or
water, having a flat tyre, puncture or flat battery.)"

"Your holiday or journey starts when you leave the place you
usually live or work (whichever is later), or from the start date
shown on your validation certificate, whichever is later. The end
of your trip is the date that you go back to the place you usually
live or work (whichever is earlier), or at the end of the period
shown on your validation certificate, whichever is earlier. "

These are copied and pasted from the I&G wording. The point is that the missed departure from Lon to CI, meant that you could not reach the original point of departure without incurring costs. They cannot surely just say that the return journey started in the US and that is the limit to this cover. The cover talks about getting back to the original departure point, so surely the London departure is part of the return journey. The policy does not appear to exclude such connecting flights from this section of cover, so on that basis I would have thought the FOS would rules in the consumers favour.

I don't think the FOS will stop you continuing your complaint now, unless there is a rule I don't know about. Give them a call and they will tell you if there is a time limit.

weirdbeardmt

Huckster - thanks - the emboldened parts in your reply are exactly the points I was relying on in my original claim. Again, it all comes down to interpretation. When I asked my father (who is a solicitor) about it, he read "original departure point" as being the point at which I left on the return journey (i.e., JFK in the US).

Whereas, I interpreted the original departure point as being my home in the Channel Islands, which is where I originally departed to start the trip.

I'll phone the FOS and find out if there's a time limit.

dacouch

It's not very well worded, I think the intention being that to qualify for the Insurance you must have lived in at least one of the acceptable areas of residence for a minimum of 6 months (Living in a different acceptable area of residence would not count towards the 6 months).

The other intention is to not pay missed departure claims for internal flights in you home area.

Here is the definition on page 2 they are referring too

Residence limits – You must have lived in the United Kingdom,
the Channel Islands or the Republic of Ireland for at least six of
the last 12 months, before you bought or renewed your policy

Bear in mind these are the current policy wordings and may have changed since you took out your cover.

Assuming the wording has not changed, it might be worth putting in an "Official Complaint" and then going to the Ombudsman on the basis of the wording not being clear. They might back down when you complain and if not the Ombudsman might back you up. It would be on the basis of the wording being unclear though