Travel insurance pre existing condition

Percybridge

I am asking this on behalf of someone I know who in my opinion was misdiagnosed as having suffered a stroke. (I am a GP - not theirs)
They hAve applied for trAvel insurance and did not - foolishly I believe - disclose the diagnosis as the premium would have been loaded.
What is the likely outcome if they need to claim?

dacouch

If they make a medical claim while they're away they will be starting a justgiving page to raise funds and a sad faced piece in the Daily Mail saying how unfair the Insurers are to refuse their claim.

The Insurers would refer to the Doctor's notes along with possibly a note from the GP and (Rightly) assume that a qualified medical doctor would have recorded their previous conditions correctly

ThinkingOutLoud_2

dacouch is fundamentally right.

Insurance relies on the honesty of the insured to disclose all relevant and material facts. If not the claim will be rejected.

You may be right about there being a wrong diagnosis. It does not matter. If they are hoping in the event they fell ill that they could argue they were falsely diagnosed - this is scary territory.

Of course, if they lose their bags (something unrelated to their medical condition) OR even perhaps claim for something medical like a cut leg (that in no way can be linked to whatever their condition is), they might escape declinature /detection. BUT, if they fell and cut their leg...and their condition whatever it was could have been even a partial cause of there fall or made the treatment more expensive - it is already looking really unpleasant.

The above however is not a situation anyone should ever put themselves in. It is often worse than dacouch says - it is almost always their family who end up remortgaging or draining their ISAs or taking out a high-interest loan to get their loved one home.

Getting cover fr their condition may not be cheap. Even if they are asked to pay hundred of pounds for fairly assessed condition to be covered, at least they and their families can sleep easily in their holiday villa beds. And by not declaring everything, the premium they did pay is a waste of money if the policy will not pay.

If they cannot bear to do buy cover - then staycation in the UK is the best alternative.

As to the Daily Mail - they do defend people who tried to declare but perhaps forgot to include something - but wilful non-disclosure is not going to get much coverage or many JustGiving donations.

Quentin

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Insurance relies on the honesty of the insured to disclose all relevant and material facts.........

Not these days. No longer are insurance contracts based on "utmost good faith" like this


You only have to answer the questions asked now - you no longer are bound by the need to disclose what you consider to be relevant/material.


(Though this won't help the OP's acquaintance as all travel insurers do ensure pre existing conditions are asked about!)

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Quentin - splitting hairs - you are 100% right.

The change in the disclosure rules law makes no difference though as you also correctly state, all travel insurers demand disclosure of medical conditions ...

So it is a moot point- the undisclosed condition will see implicated claims declined as the question is always asked.

katejo

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Quentin - splitting hairs - you are 100% right.

The change in the disclosure rules law makes no difference though as you also correctly state, all travel insurers demand disclosure of medical conditions ...

So it is a moot point- the undisclosed condition will see implicated claims declined as the question is always asked.

Following a recent hospital test I received a printout which included, at the top, my supposed pre existing conditions. One of them was completely new to me. I had never been diagnosed with it to the best of my knowledge. I immediately complained to my GP who explained that, on their records, i had not been diagnosed with the condition. However the coding used by hospitals for routine blood tests had shown a result which suggests this condition (only if supported by further tests). My other tests were clear.
I am really annoyed by this. I pointed out that, in the event of illness on holiday, i could possibly have a claim refused due to not declaring the condition. I don't currently have any bookings or a policy but that isn't the point. The condition in question is symptom free until it becomes advanced so I'd have no reason to suspect it.

Am I overreacting or being sensible?

rs65

katejo wrote: »

Following a recent hospital test I received a printout which included, at the top, my supposed pre existing conditions. One of them was completely new to me. I had never been diagnosed with it to the best of my knowledge. I immediately complained to my GP who explained that, on their records, i had not been diagnosed with the condition. However the coding used by hospitals for routine blood tests had shown a result which suggests this condition (only if supported by further tests). My other tests were clear.
I am really annoyed by this. I pointed out that, in the event of illness on holiday, i could possibly have a claim refused due to not declaring the condition. I don't currently have any bookings or a policy but that isn't the point. The condition in question is symptom free until it becomes advanced so I'd have no reason to suspect it.

Am I overreacting or being sensible?

From an insurance perspective you are over reacting. You have not been diagnosed with the condition.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Katejo - you are being sensible to think this through.

So my understanding is the first test showed a possible condition, but after subsequent tests, the condition was not confirmed. In fact, your doctor effectively has it on record that you have been tested negative for this condition.

So it is common for insurers to ask if you are awaiting any further tests or diagnosis - but I think you are saying it is all tested and the result negative...so you need only declare the conditions you have confirmed.

Good Luck.

Captain_Jac_1962

I am looking for advice regarding Annual Travel Insurance. My spouse and I have worldwide travel insurance which is about to expire on the 1st February 2017 which we had every intention of renewing immediately. We have a holiday booked for Feb 2018 for which we have paid the deposit for (a cruise) and are intending to have numerous trips abroad before then. My spouse has recently ((in the last month) had to have medical investigations and is now, as of today, awaiting surgery for a medical condition, which will not be fully diagnosed until an MRI scan and surgery have been undertaken (in the next 2-3months). I am in a quandary as to whether we should re-new are travel insurance, as we will now have to declare that medical investigations are taking place hence the premium could go up dramatically, or let it expire until we know more from the investigations, obviously running the risk of losing our deposit if the cruise company should collapse in the interim period that we are without insurance. I feel we are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea. Does anyone have any similar experiences or advice they are willing to share with us, if so it would be very much appreciated. Thank you.

Quentin

Whenever you renew you will have to declare all your conditions.


You also have to disclose any new conditions at the time of booking any new trips, even if you have an annual policy in place. (You say you intend taking more trips than just the cruise)


You will know the size of the cruise deposit at risk, and whether or not being uninsured is a cost effective risk

zombie

I have had silly quotes for 12 day holiday insurance to Barbados from £1190 to £3000!!! Just because I disclosed 2 medical conditions.

I just want to insure cancellation (not due to above medical conditions) I want to insure my laptop/camera/mobile phone etc. I want to insure against accidents/ just the usual stuff.

I am 76 in good health apart from Mitral Valve Regurgitation. I have lived with it for many years.

So I have been told by various insurers you can't have cover without disclosing pre-medic conditions.

I am willing to accept that my pre-medic conditions could/will be excluded, but they refuse to insure me.

Does anyone have any suggestions? I would be most grateful.

thanks