Travel insurance pre existing condition

katejo

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

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.

Not exactly but it is a long story to tell here. I am angry because the original tests were done during a referral to a completely different hospital dept and then a 'diagnosis' appears to have been entered on my records without any consultation with an appropriate specialist and without my knowing anything about it.
I do actually have an appointment with a relevant specialist next week (entirely separate referral to a different hospital) so I will wait for that before booking any holidays.

I am just annoyed that someone can have a 'diagnosis' on their records and not be told about it. I have since come across someone else who discovered that she had the same condition on her records but the GP had decided not to tell her about it. She found out when she logged into her patient records online and it was there. I don't have access to mine.

katejo

zombie wrote: »

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

But you might find that, in the case of an accident on holiday, your insurer would refuse to pay out because you hadn't declared the pre existing condition (particularly if it might have caused the accident).

McKneff

Anyone not taking out insurance and going out of the country would be so unbelievably stupid. Friend of mines husband, hale and hearty 70 yr old . Heart attack , 6 weeks in hospital, her in a hotel and eventually an air ambulance home....cost the insurance more than their house was worth, good job they had it

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Katejo

I sympathise with you. The world of expanding medical tests and records coming headlong up against insurer's attitude and cover intricacy is complex and sometimes unfathomable.

Firstly, as per your friend, you always have a right to see your medical records. Full details are here - http://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/1309.aspx?categoryid=68

I guess to be diagnosed with something as a side-outcome from a test is happening more and more as test become more sophisticated. But, perhaps the doctor testing for condition A is not necessarily the right person to tell you about condition B.

I think if the accurate results were not recorded, then that would be remiss too. Likewise some test results can be incorrect or misleading or need interpretation - so I guess a relevant doctor should be reviewing, as is now going to take place, talking to you?

Finally, I reckon you are right to await the consultation - make sure to mention your need to know anything that might be relevant to your travel insurance declaration.

Good luck.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Zombie

The others are right. If you do not declare your conditions - then your insurer will have the right to decline claims.

Insurers may be willing to offer cover excluding a very specific condition. But, while I am no doctor, I believe Mitral Valve Regurgitation can lead to a wide range of related events. It would be difficult / impossible for you or the insurer to prove if the event and the costs of treatment were attributable in part whole or not at all. Hence, they can refuse to cover the condition or demand additional premium to do so.

You said 2 conditions, but only mention Mitral Valve Regurgitation.

Now let us consider the increase in costs. This has several aspects:-
- most insurers use a statistically-based system that uses the "cost of claims" driven by a condition to produce a premium loading - so it is not arbitrary
- while you say you are fit - it is simple truth that the older we are the more likely we are to fall ill and the longer and more complex treatment for anything may be
- each condition will have a range of treatments necessary and more serious ones bring the potential for needing some kind of medically supported repatriation
- destination and sometimes condition will affect costs in several material ways:
> the scale of costs for the same treatment can vary country by country with the USA way higher than say France for most things
> not all islands (e.g. Barbados) have every medical facility/consultant type in abundance and sometimes patient are evacuated to the mainland - for Barbados think Miami which is amongst the most expensive places in the USA
> anything heart related tends to be complex and expensive with intensive care, let alone surgery costing many thousands per day. And if you recover, it is usually weeks before you can be declared fit to fly and allowed on a regular plane home
> an air ambulance will have many many miles to fly back to the UK and usually need multiple "hops" from Barbados

So I suspect your condition(s) and going to Barbados at age 76 are combining to produce a high risk assessment and so premium loading.

You mention cancellation cover which for sure will be a significant part of the premium, but the medical costs and repatriation cover probably far outweigh this.

The non-medical covers rates for you should be the same price as for anyone going on your holiday - age and medical conditions don't affect these.

So how to solve. As others say - please don't put your entire wealth at risk by not buying cover. Try and get quotes from several of the UK's major specialist providers of travel insurance for those with medical conditions.

Start with All Clear Travel, Avanti and Freespirit for a baseline and search Google for more as you wish.

Good luck

katejo

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Katejo

I sympathise with you. The world of expanding medical tests and records coming headlong up against insurer's attitude and cover intricacy is complex and sometimes unfathomable.

Firstly, as per your friend, you always have a right to see your medical records. Full details are here - http://www.nhs.uk/chq/pages/1309.aspx?categoryid=68

I guess to be diagnosed with something as a side-outcome from a test is happening more and more as test become more sophisticated. But, perhaps the doctor testing for condition A is not necessarily the right person to tell you about condition B.

I think if the accurate results were not recorded, then that would be remiss too. Likewise some test results can be incorrect or misleading or need interpretation - so I guess a relevant doctor should be reviewing, as is now going to take place, talking to you?

Finally, I reckon you are right to await the consultation - make sure to mention your need to know anything that might be relevant to your travel insurance declaration.

Good luck.

Thanks for this. I can now give you an update to this. I saw the relevant specialist on Monday. It was actually a separate referral not directly connected to the other hospital but I took the opportunity to ask about the condition in question. She reassured me that I didn't have the condition. I made my point to her about the implications for any type of insurance policy and she appeared to agree. My view is the following:


If a test indicates a possible new problem:
Either the patient needs to be informed if they definitely have the condition or a referral is needed to an appropriate doctor for further tests. As you said above a 'diagnosis' shouldn't be made by a different dept. based solely on a blood test result.


I do wonder how many people have been caught out in the way and denied insurance pay outs for conditions which the medical practitioners didn't tell them about. If they have no symptoms, they might have no reason to ask.

PersianCatLady

Percybridge wrote: »

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?

Am I right in thinking that you are saying that the doctor who examined the patient at the time was WRONG in diagnosing a stroke and your diagnosis of the patient not having a stroke is correct, even though you weren't there when the diagnosis was made??

PersianCatLady

dacouch wrote: »

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

From the sounds of it you get as annoyed with these stories as I do.


Honestly the worst part of them is that they make out insurance companies to be so terrible when actually the person who lied to get a cheap premium is the one that is in the wrong.

PersianCatLady

Captain_Jac_1962 wrote: »

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.

I would think that if you post this question as a brand new thread of your own that you might get more responses.


Unfortunately I think a lot of people have missed your question because it is in the middle of someone else's thread.

PersianCatLady

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

You mention cancellation cover which for sure will be a significant part of the premium, but the medical costs and repatriation cover probably far outweigh this.

I still think that the insurers would want to know your existing conditions with regards to just the cancellation cover as if you were taken ill before your holiday the pre-existing conditions may be exactly the reason why you need to claim for cancelling the holiday.