Consequential Loss on travel insurance

BarneyBanjo

Hi

I have recently had part of a travel insurance claim rejected under a 'consequential loss' clause. I was wondering whether people could advise whether this is a 'valid' reason

I had to cancel a climbing trip in Nepal due to injury, and at the time of booking the trip took out a mountaineering specific insurance policy to cover me for the period I was away - all through the same travel company.

Having claimed under my packaged bank account travel insurance policy, I have now had the cost of the trip refunded (and air fares etc.), but they have refused payment to me of this additional mountaineering insurance premium, because they state it's a 'consequential loss'.

Am I unreasonable in expecting this should be covered?

Many Thanks

rs65

As per your last post, have you checked to see what is covered by the policy?

fairy2

was it compulsory to have the mountaineering specific insurance policy for your trip (some trips do have compulsory cover)?

have you checked if your bank account travel policy itself says you will not be covered for dangerous activities (even better if it says and you therefore need to seek spcific cover yourself for this)?

BarneyBanjo

Yes. there is nothing explicitly stating it should not be covered, so when I queried the non-payment with the insurance company, their response was that it was not covered as it was a 'consequential loss'. Hence, me asking this further question on this forum.

BarneyBanjo

fairy2 wrote: »

was it compulsory to have the mountaineering specific insurance policy for your trip (some trips do have compulsory cover)?

have you checked if your bank account travel policy itself says you will not be covered for dangerous activities (even better if it says and you therefore need to seek spcific cover yourself for this)?

Thank you for your response; this particular policy I purchased wasn't compulsory, though 'sufficient insurance coverage for the trip' was. My bank account coverage almost certainly specifically excludes dangerous activities.

rs65

BarneyBanjo wrote: »

Yes. there is nothing explicitly stating it should not be covered,

What does it say is covered? For example, one I just looked at covers the personal accomodation and transport changes if you have to cancel your trip.

fairy2

In that case I would think you should get it paid back. Consequential loss is how likely the loss is e.g. if you had paid £500 to put your dog in kennels while you were away and then did not go and could not get refund insurer would probably not pay out. However if the policy said you need to have sufficient insurance cover in place for mountaineering and you had booked a mountaineering policy then my opinion is it is reasonably forseeable you would have this cover. I am not an expert but it almost seems to be a requirement in this case and should therefore be covered. Hopefully someone with more knowledge then me will be along soon

BarneyBanjo

fairy2 wrote: »

In that case I would think you should get it paid back. Consequential loss is how likely the loss is e.g. if you had paid £500 to put your dog in kennels while you were away and then did not go and could not get refund insurer would probably not pay out. However if the policy said you need to have sufficient insurance cover in place for mountaineering and you had booked a mountaineering policy then my opinion is it is reasonably forseeable you would have this cover. I am not an expert but it almost seems to be a requirement in this case and should therefore be covered. Hopefully someone with more knowledge then me will be along soon

I appreciate your opinion, expert or not! I think you make some valid points which I will pursue with my insurer. I can understand the necessity for 'consequential loss' clauses, but it just seemed to me inappropriate reasoning for non-payment in my case - as you say it was a requirement of the trip etc. But I am certainly no expert in travel insurance, thankfully!

Anyway, thank you.

BarneyBanjo

rs65 wrote: »

What does it say is covered? For example, one I just looked at covers the personal accomodation and transport changes if you have to cancel your trip.

In short, "We will pay you up to the amount shown in your policy schedule for any irrecoverable unused travel and accommodation costs (including excursions up to £250) and other
prepaid charges (including green fees of up to £75 per day, up to a maximum of £300 where the appropriate golf equipment premium has been paid) which you have paid or are contracted to pay together with any reasonable additional travel expenses incurred"

I would suggest the insurance premium is a 'prepaid charge' perhaps?

fairy2

I think this strengthens your position. Otherwise they would be saying in your case we will reimburse you for mountain equipment hire but not for the mountaineering insurance which we told you you had to take out. Would be nonsensical.

rs65

BarneyBanjo wrote: »

I would suggest the insurance premium is a 'prepaid charge' perhaps?

Its worth having the argument with them, but I wouldn't hold out much hope to be honest. Give it a go though.