Travel insurance questions (my parents unable to come to family holiday they booked)

mavenmim

My parents booked a holiday cabin on the coast for a long weekend for them (a retired couple), us (a working age couple) and my children (teenage twins). They paid for the whole booking, which was quite expensive due to it being in the school summer holidays, I think about £1400. The balance of the booking cost was paid a few weeks ago.

They are normally a very fit and active couple, and they travel a fair bit independently even though they are in their late 70s. They then went away for a separate 3-night trip themselves to Dublin a fortnight ago, to include going to an event with booked tickets (something along the lines of a religious retreat).

Unfortunately my Dad lost consciousness during the flight over, and was taken off the plane by ambulance and spent the whole planned trip in hospital. My Mum had to get a taxi from the hospital to the airport to collect their luggage and then taxis back and forth from the hotel to the hospital to take my Dad his medication, and to visit each day, as they wouldn't let her stay with him except during visiting hours. They said he had unusually low blood pressure and heart rate, with a heart murmur and needed further investigations. However by the end of their booked time in Ireland they didn't find anything specific and he seemed to be recovering somewhat, so he was permitted to fly back, using a wheelchair through the airport at either side.

When he got home he felt very unwell, couldn't pass urine and subsequently collapsed again. He had to be taken back to hospital in England, where he then spent the day in A&E - in isolation as he then tested positive for covid - where they fitted a catheter and did lots of tests. They tried to discharge him home and he collapsed again, and had to return to hospital for another 24 hours before they let him go home.

It is unclear whether he caught covid in the hospital in Dublin, or from the flight, or whether it was the cause of him passing out in the first place (though he had no covid symptoms and didn't test positive until four days later). He has subsequently been very unwell with covid, which my Mum also caught. They are still testing positive after two weeks, and neither of them is in a fit state to travel for the planned long weekend with us on the coast this weekend. So they have told us to go without them so as not to waste the booking entirely.

My parents have a Lloyds Bank travel policy as part of their banking package. However, they have been told that there is nothing that can be claimed from their Dublin experience, except if there were medical expenses (which there don't seem to be). Does that sound right, or are they being fobbed off about things like the taxi costs, the tickets for the retreat or even the hotel?

More importantly, we are wondering whether they can claim anything for the upcoming booking this weekend, or whether the fact that anyone in the family is able to go would mean that they are stuck with the full bill. It would be incredibly unfair if they are still lumped with the full cost of the booking if they can't come, but there is no option to cancel or to downgrade to a two-bed cabin, and we can't afford to pick up the cost for a 4-bed cabin when we wouldn't have booked the trip without them.

We need to understand whether we should still go on the trip to get some value from the booking, and whether my parents are able to make a claim for some or all of the costs they have paid. How does it work with an extended family booking in this situation?

elsien

Lloyds bank  have different cover levels depending on which bank account it is. You probably need to read the specific terms and conditions for their account.
And ask them to point it out to you, the section in the policy which states that the additional taxi expenses aren’t  covered and the reason why. I’m not sure why the hotel would be covered, if it’s one they would’ve been staying in anyway?

For example, I don’t understand why your mother needed to get Taxi to the hospital to take his medication. Surely the hospital would provide any medication necessary while he was in there? So some of the refusal may be down to how the claim has been worded. I don’t think the retreat tickets would be covered, on a packaged bank account policy. 

I’ve only looked at the Lloyds silver policy, but that clearly states that there is a much lower limit to what you can claim in your home country. You may find that that impacts on how much they would be willing to pay out for the forthcoming long weekend. Plan B might be that you each cover your own share of the cost.

You really need to check the relevant terms and conditions for a bit more detail.

mavenmim

elsien said:

I don’t understand why your mother needed to get Taxi to the hospital to take his medication. Surely the hospital would provide any medication necessary while he was in there?

Yeah, I can understand why someone might assume that, but that's not how it works, even within the UK, let alone in another country. Overstretched medical staff don't have any capacity to review and supply medication for existing conditions. For starters the first 4-24 hours is spent in A&E, where you don't get anything beyond a triage screening and someone monitoring your temperature and blood pressure - yet many conditions require tablets several times per day and missing them can lead to increased risks from various conditions. Even if a person is admitted via A&E they don't get a consultant opthalmologist to reassess and prescribe their glaucoma medication, or get a prostate cancer specialist to re-assess and prescribe medication to prevent prostate changes developing into cancer, or a migraine specialist to reassess and prescribe migraine prevention, or a GP to prescribe new statins or blood pressure medication. They just treat the emergency condition, and expect you to bring your prescribed medication if you need to be admitted, or get it sent from home. When treated in Ireland there isn't even a means to access to your medical records to issue tablets off the back of the existing prescriptions, or a pharmacy that would keep everything every patient might need in stock. [source - personal experience as a patient, and 16 years working in the NHS]

I will try to get hold of the actual policy wording to see what is covered. I just hoped someone would be able to advise on the general premise of what happens with group holidays, and bookings where the organiser/paying customer can't attend due to ill health.

CSI_Yorkshire

mavenmim said:

I will try to get hold of the actual policy wording to see what is covered. I just hoped someone would be able to advise on the general premise of what happens with group holidays, and bookings where the organiser/paying customer can't attend due to ill health.

There isn't a blanket general premise.  It very much depends on the policy wording.

The ones lumped with bank accounts are not commonly on the generous end of policies though.

mavenmim

Oh, okay. I assumed it would have come up for other people, and that there would be some general advice.

CSI_Yorkshire

It has come up for other people, and they've discovered they were covered for different things.

Some policies say that if one can't travel, all can cancel and the whole thing is covered.

Some say that if one can't travel, their part is covered pro-rata and everybody else doesn't get anything because not travelling is their choice.

Some have one thing for overseas and a different thing for UK.  Some have the same for both.

silvercar

It is all dependent on the policy detail, but often you will find that cancellation would be covered if you or people travelling with you are unable to travel for an insurable reason. So in this case, you/ they may be entitled to claim the full cost of the holiday back. If you were to proceed without your parents it may be that their share would be covered, or it may not. 

dunroving

I don't know if this will help any, and I'm not seeking advice myself or trying to hijack your thread. I'm just having a similar experience and thought it might shed some light on the issues with travel insurance, the need to check T&Cs, and the fact that T&Cs are often not specific enough to determine what's covered.

Similar to your parents, I was in Ireland, but for a "point to point" (bottom to top) cycling holiday, moving every day to a new hotel along the 10-day route. On Day 8, I and one other cyclist came down with a nasty food poisoning/vomiting bug. From that point onwards, both of us (a) were unable to cycle (obviously), or participate in any of the other package holiday benefits like food, transport, etc, because we (b) were told we had to stay away from the rest of the group.

I called my insurer's (Post Office) medical emergency line, and they gave me the location of the hospital at my next scheduled stop (50 miles away). I went there by taxi, spent 10 hours in A&E, was treated (anti-emetics and saline drip) and discharged close to midnight. Next day, I travelled again by taxi to the next/final scheduled stop, in Belfast, from where I made my way home two days earlier than scheduled, by a re-arranged flight. (Long story, I had planned to stay on in Belfast for a couple of days after the package holiday finished).

The insurer's call handlers have nickled and dimed all the way, saying I couldn't claim the costs of the taxis, nor the loss of two days' package holiday, because I didn't return before the end of the package holiday - but clearly, an airline will not allow a vomiting passenger to board a plane, so I couldn't have returned earlier! Anyway, long story short is that through determination and persuasive argument, they are gradually accepting that I had no choice but to follow the course of action that I did. Time will tell whether I recoup any of my expenses.

Similar to your father, I have another holiday booked, in a month, to cycle France end-to-end. Ironically, it turned out after my return from Ireland that I caught Covid, almost definitely in A&E in Ireland, and am in no fit state to ride a bike 1,000 miles, even though it's in 3+ weeks (if it were a "normal" holiday, I'd probably be OK). At the moment, it looks like cancelling this next holiday will cost me 80% of the total holiday cost (package holiday cancellation policy if cancelled < 60 days ahead). Additionally, I likely won't be eligible to recoup any of that cost from insurance as (a) I probably *could* go on holiday, just not a cycling holiday, and (b) their policies state I'd have to test Covid positive within 14 days of the scheduled departure date.

Anyway, the key take-home messages I've learned are: to check T&Cs very, very carefully (if they even have enough detail to do so, that is); "travel" insurance companies seem to have difficulty responding to issues with non-"holiday" travel, (c) certain types of holiday issues (like your parent's inability to access the holiday services they had planned) throw another spanner in the works; and, of course, insurers will do everything they can to wriggle out of paying anything. I think they just hope you'll throw your hands up in despair and give in.

CSI_Yorkshire

dunroving said:

insurers will do everything they can to wriggle out of paying anything. 

This often gets brought up, and it simply isn't true.  It wasn't even true in the dark days of the past when policy breaches didn't need to be particularly pertinent.

Insurers are not allowed to pay for things that are not covered by the policy.  That's why it's so important to read the policy documents.  It's not a negotiation or based on how sorry the case handler feels for you.

The process is just validating that what has happened and what you are claiming is actually covered by the wording that was agreed.

Sometimes mistakes get made, or wording is vague and down to interpretation, but that's why there is the complaints process and the ombudsman.  About 30% of insurance complaints are upheld by the ombudsman according to the most recent figures - of which quite a lot were complaints about the settlement value for written off cars or complaints about buildings guarantees (note this is not buildings insurance).

dunroving

CSI_Yorkshire said:

dunroving said:

insurers will do everything they can to wriggle out of paying anything. 

This often gets brought up, and it simply isn't true.  It wasn't even true in the dark days of the past when policy breaches didn't need to be particularly pertinent.

Insurers are not allowed to pay for things that are not covered by the policy.  That's why it's so important to read the policy documents.  It's not a negotiation or based on how sorry the case handler feels for you.

The process is just validating that what has happened and what you are claiming is actually covered by the wording that was agreed.

Sometimes mistakes get made, or wording is vague and down to interpretation, but that's why there is the complaints process and the ombudsman.  About 30% of insurance complaints are upheld by the ombudsman according to the most recent figures - of which quite a lot were complaints about the settlement value for written off cars or complaints about buildings guarantees (note this is not buildings insurance).

I beg to disagree. If you had heard the conversation I had with the call handler a few days ago, I think you might take a different view, also. To be most charitable, I'd say the person didn't understand the policy T&Cs himself. Every time, I'd recite the T&C, he would put me on hold and come back saying that Yes, I was correct. This happened regarding four different things he originally said would not be covered. It certainly felt distinctly like his stock response was along the lines of, "Computer says no ...."

CSI_Yorkshire

dunroving said:

CSI_Yorkshire said:

dunroving said:

insurers will do everything they can to wriggle out of paying anything. 

This often gets brought up, and it simply isn't true.  It wasn't even true in the dark days of the past when policy breaches didn't need to be particularly pertinent.

Insurers are not allowed to pay for things that are not covered by the policy.  That's why it's so important to read the policy documents.  It's not a negotiation or based on how sorry the case handler feels for you.

The process is just validating that what has happened and what you are claiming is actually covered by the wording that was agreed.

Sometimes mistakes get made, or wording is vague and down to interpretation, but that's why there is the complaints process and the ombudsman.  About 30% of insurance complaints are upheld by the ombudsman according to the most recent figures - of which quite a lot were complaints about the settlement value for written off cars or complaints about buildings guarantees (note this is not buildings insurance).

I beg to disagree. If you had heard the conversation I had with the call handler a few days ago, I think you might take a different view, also. To be most charitable, I'd say the person didn't understand the policy T&Cs himself. Every time, I'd recite the T&C, he would put me on hold and come back saying that Yes, I was correct. This happened regarding four different things he originally said would not be covered. It certainly felt distinctly like his stock response was along the lines of, "Computer says no ...."

So, it was exactly as I said then.  Working to the T&Cs.  Call handler was ill-informed or mistaken, and when challenged the T&C wording wins out.

It's not "wriggling out of paying" if you say "the T&Cs say X" and they say "ok, then you get X"

Also, your single anecdote does not prove the general statement that "insurers will do everything"..