Leisure Guard Travel Insurance (Partnered with AXA) - my current experience

HUMBUG

1.Went on golfing holiday to France so took out a 4-day short trip standard travel insurance with them and paid a bit more for zero excess. 
2. I did read the small print but sometimes interpreting what their 'get out' clauses are can be a bit confusing. 
3. Travelled to France (my partner booked the hotel and golf via Golbreaks)  but after 1 day, he had to curtail the holiday because his son was being rushed into hospital with suspected meningitis.
4. Travelled back to UK the next day and tried to ring Leisure Guard Claim number 0204 517 9889.  Automated message and music for 25 mins, no reply so hung up.
5. Used their online claims form and completed as much as I could to trigger a start to the claims process for curtailment of holiday. Said I couldn't attach the golf booking forms, hotel receipts, proof of evidence of the curtailment, etc, until my partners emergency situation had been resolved and he was back to some sort of normality.  
6. Got a phone call from abroad with some oriental lady speaking to me like some sort of robot, pointing me to their policy details regarding curtailment and saying it would be declined because I was not related to my partner. 
7. I told them it was not easy to decipher their 'get out' clauses, but she insisted it was clear. 
8. Told her:
a. That I wanted a detailed written letter from them about their reasoning to decline my claim for £173 (hotel and golf booking for 2 days).
b. I would be sending an email to the AXA CEO regarding the above.
c. That In the meantime, I would be raising feedback of my experience on Google, Moneysavingexpert, Trustpilot.

Basically, I do not recommend 'Leisure Guard Travel Insurance' or their partners AXA.

The fact that this lady spoke to me like some 'unfeeling robot', while declining my holiday curtailment claim, and also saying "have a nice day" seems a bit of a disgraceful way to treat their customers.

Please avoid at all costs!!!!

DullGreyGuy

So you both went on the holiday or just one of you?

You say your partner had to curtail his holiday due to his son... did you mean "we had to" or did you continue the holiday?

How long have you been together? Do you cohabit? Are you married?  Does the son live with your or the ex/independent?

Was your claim for him, you or both of you? Was it a single or couple policy? Which cover level did you buy? When did you buy it?

HUMBUG

DullGreyGuy said:

So you both went on the holiday or just one of you?

You say your partner had to curtail his holiday due to his son... did you mean "we had to" or did you continue the holiday?

How long have you been together? Do you cohabit? Are you married?  Does the son live with your or the ex/independent?

Was your claim for him, you or both of you? Was it a single or couple policy? Which cover level did you buy? When did you buy it?

Both, he's an old mate of mine and we both golf together every year in France.

He's got the car (I cannot drive)  so we both had to curtail our holiday otherwise I am stranded.

We are both males and he is married with kids (we just golf together every year).

He had his own insurance policy while I had a different one (have been doing it every year for 20 years).

My policy was for me only to cover for a Single Trip , and I bought it in mid-Aug 22.


Here is the bolded word she used to decline my claim:

What is covered for cutting short your trip:

The death, injury due to an accident, illness, disease, or pregnancy complication of you, your travel companion or your close relative. Please note: Any pandemic illness is not covered within 48 hours of your policy purchase date.

HUMBUG

Actually, I remember reading the above before and actually thought it meant covered for the illness, etc of my travel companion's close relatives too. 

This is an extract of an email I've sent  AXA CEO UK:

"Further to my previous email, here is the bolded highlighted word that your people have used to decline my claim. 

"The death, injury due to an accident, illness, disease, or pregnancy complication of you, your travel companion or your close relative. Please note: Any pandemic illness is not covered within 48 hours of your policy purchase date."

The way I've interpreted that sentence is meaning both mine and my travel companion.  You have not made that sentence clear enough and you should have stated clearly (and without ambiguity) that I am not covered if there was were an injury due to accident/illness/disease or pregnancy to your travel companion's close relatives.

If you decline my claim, I will proceed to escalate to the FCA."

nonex_2

It's one of these:

- death

- injury

- illness

- disease

- etc

of one of these

- you
- your close retative

- your travelling companion

You're arguing for the illness of your travelling companion's close relative. That's not an interpretation supported by any reasonable reading of the terms. I don't think there's any ambiguity.

So, seems okay for them to have turned it down, unfortunately.

Unless this was a policy you and he were both covered under Because then "you" is probably defined as either of the insured people, so his close relatives are "your close relatives".

I go on holidays with friends (not my wife and not family) sometimes and I wouldn't expect to be able to get a refund if one of my mates' grans got sick! So I don't think this is an unreasonable restriction of cover or a "get out" clause.

HUMBUG

nonex_2 said:

It's one of these:

- death

- injury

- illness

- disease

- etc

of one of these

- you
- your close retative

- your travelling companion

You're arguing for the illness of your travelling companion's close relative. That's not an interpretation supported by any reasonable reading of the terms. I don't think there's any ambiguity.

So, seems okay for them to have turned it down, unfortunately.

Unless this was a policy you and he were both covered under Because then "you" is probably defined as either of the insured people, so his close relatives are "your close relatives".

I go on holidays with friends (not my wife and not family) sometimes and I wouldn't expect to be able to get a refund if one of my mates' grans got sick! So I don't think this is an unreasonable restriction of cover or a "get out" clause.

Your probably correct but personally, I don't think it was made clear enough and they need to address that. Therefore, I will proceed with the complaint and if necessary, an FCA complaint. 

If they'd said the following, then it would have been 'crystal' clear.

" You are not covered if there was were an injury due to accident/illness/disease or pregnancy to your travel companion's close relatives."

nonex_2

Insurers only exclude things that would otherwise be covered by the listed insured events.

Otherwise (taken to an absurd extreme) they'd need to say that: 

You are not covered due to an illness/injury of a friend
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of a friend's close relative
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of your neighbour
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of your neighbour's close relative
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of your neighbour's close relative's friend
etc etc

Instead insurers list what is covered, and then carve-out exceptions (called exclusions) that might otherwise fall under this. They wouldn't exclude something that they didn't imply was covered in the first place. 

Anyway, not trying to be a downer, but just don't want you to waste your time if it's not necessary.

Best of luck taking it forward.

DullGreyGuy

The FCA do not deal with individual complaints other than whistleblowers or people acting without licenses

Consumer complaints are dealt with by the Financial Ombudsman who's authority stems from the FCA. However to get a complaint to the FOS you must first of made a complaint to the company in question and either 1) had a final response/deadlock letter or 2) 8 weeks have passed since the complaint, whichever is sooner.

Your odds however are not favourable if your wording is the same as the one on their website. If you have a look at https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN9073779.pdf it is a similar case where two friends were due to go on holiday and the son of one of them received a terminal diagnosis. They both cancelled but the friend and complainant had the claim declined as the friend's son did not meet the definition of close relative

HUMBUG

DullGreyGuy said:

The FCA do not deal with individual complaints other than whistleblowers or people acting without licenses

Consumer complaints are dealt with by the Financial Ombudsman who's authority stems from the FCA. However to get a complaint to the FOS you must first of made a complaint to the company in question and either 1) had a final response/deadlock letter or 2) 8 weeks have passed since the complaint, whichever is sooner.

Your odds however are not favourable if your wording is the same as the one on their website. If you have a look at https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN9073779.pdf it is a similar case where two friends were due to go on holiday and the son of one of them received a terminal diagnosis. They both cancelled but the friend and complainant had the claim declined as the friend's son did not meet the definition of close relative

Many thanks for this and yes, this example is close to my scenario.  The fact that my travel companion was too stressed to continue with the holiday (his son has suspected meningitis) and needed to get back home to his wife and other son seems to hold no importance. Maybe I need to email them again and ask them whether they regard their denial of my claim as morally correct.

HUMBUG

nonex_2 said:

Insurers only exclude things that would otherwise be covered by the listed insured events.

Otherwise (taken to an absurd extreme) they'd need to say that: 

You are not covered due to an illness/injury of a friend
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of a friend's close relative
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of your neighbour
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of your neighbour's close relative
You are not covered due to an illness/injury of your neighbour's close relative's friend
etc etc

Instead insurers list what is covered, and then carve-out exceptions (called exclusions) that might otherwise fall under this. They wouldn't exclude something that they didn't imply was covered in the first place. 

Anyway, not trying to be a downer, but just don't want you to waste your time if it's not necessary.

Best of luck taking it forward.

Many thanks but I think a one liner like the one I mentioned in my previous post (copy below) might be all they needed. Not many people even read their policy documents, although I did take some time reading mine before I travelled. I was checking for more probable events that I could be insured for rather than the improbable, so their clause didn't even enter into my thinking. 

" You are not covered if there was were an injury due to accident/illness/disease or pregnancy to your travel companion's close relatives."

HUMBUG

Here's a question:

I didn't pay for my holiday as it was all done by my golfing partner.  He obviously has a right to claim if his policy covers for curtailment due to his son's illness. So can he claim for the 2/3 cost of the holiday that was curtailed (including the cost of mine)?

The hotel booking was under his name
The golf rounds booked were under his name