HSBC Travel Insurance dependents warning

johnm85

I have had free HSBC Premier travel insurance for many years. Every year I receive a letter from HSBC reminding me of the eligibility requirements - under 70, resident in the UK etc. This letter always states that the insurance covers me, my partner who lives with me, and any dependent children under 18 or under 23 if they are in full time education. There are no footnotes or indications of any other conditions which may apply to the eligibility requirements except notification of pre-existing medical conditions. I therefore believed that my children were covered for any trips they made, and last year my daughter went to Poland and Vietnam with friends. There is a 40 page booklet issued by HSBC which gives detail of the cover - I reviewed this last year and was happy that my daughter's activities were covered. However, in rereading this booklet this year I noticed in the small print that dependents are generally only covered if travelling with the policy holder - therefore my daughter was not covered last year. Fortunately there were no incidents requiring an insurance claim. Frankly I'm shocked that I missed this, and shocked that HSBC do not highlight this condition in their annual letter given its importance. I will try to feed this back to HSBC, but I also wanted to highlight this here in case anyone else is misled. It is clear online via a pop-up exceptions table, but people like myself who have had Premier for years have never needed to look at this online and hence rely on the paper communications.

michele-p

Thanks for the info on this, I would imagine many may not be aware. My husband is about to upgrade his Nationwide Flex to a Flex plus account, meaning the whole family is covered for worldwide travel insurance, I did ask him to check if that meant I could travel alone and be covered as it's not a joint account. Will make sure he double checks this now!

shaun_from_Africa

johnm85 wrote: »

However, in rereading this booklet this year I noticed in the small print that dependents are generally only covered if travelling with the policy holder

Small print?
https://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/PA_esf-ca-app-content/content/pws/content/personal/pdfs/worldwide-travel-insurance-policy.pdf

Welcome to your HSBC Premier Travel Insurance
Please take time to read this booklet as it contains important information. If you have a question and cannot find the answer either below or in the policy wording, please contact Customer Services.

There is a very large box entitled "Who is covered by this policy?"
and this clearly states:

Cover is for you, the account holder(s), your partner (providing you are both under 70 years of age at the start date of your trip), and your children travelling with you if, at the start date of the trip, they are under 18 years of age (or under 23 if in full time education and living at home outside of term time).

johnm85

Thanks Shaun. Yes, the information is definitely in the booklet, as you state. Nevertheless, despite reading this in some detail, I still managed to miss it. I don't know how - possibly because it was on a very busy page on the back of the front page, although it is mentioned again further in the document.

Incidentally, something else I discovered in looking into this is that an updated policy document was issued on 1st December 2017 (available online, although I have not been sent a copy). Again, the information is contained within the document, but the summary box you refer to no longer exists. On the front page it again states - 'children are eligible if they are aged under 18 years old (or under 23 years old and in full time education and living at home outside of term time)' - without any further qualification, which I think is confusing.

I think therefore I still stand by my point that at least the paper documentation is potentially misleading, given the importance of ensuring that dependants are covered. I hope this discussion will prevent anyone else making the same mistake as I did.

Neil49

I've got a similar policy with Lloyds Bank and the conditions regarding the fact that the policy holder has to be travelling are the same.

It just shows that you should always read the policy.

johnm85

Thanks Neil - you are absolutely correct about reading the policy. In practice I actually did this, so I can't believe that I missed the relevant exclusion clause.

Obviously this is my fault. I have banked with HSBC for many years, and have always been completely satisfied. However, in this case, whilst it is clear online I do think it is somewhat unsatisfactory that the paper documentation refers in a number of instances to dependants being covered, without mentioning the conditions or even pointing the reader towards them. I looked up some of the details of the Lloyds policy - this is much clearer (although it would be interesting to understand how the 'responsible adult' clause would apply in this situation where you had a 20 year old student travelling with a 21 year old friend!)