Rip Off travel insurance with Medical conditions

csh57

hello all,
I wish Martin would tackle this subject for older people. I have looked up reviews on most of the recommended companies who have amazing reviews on how easy it is to take out a policy. However looking at the people who have had to claim,   most of the reviews are awful.. The premiums are a crazy price too.. one of us has a few conditions to enter but very fit to travel and i am shocked at the prices and battles people have to get a payout,, kind of ruins booking a holiday abroad now 

Hoenir

Where's the rip off though? 

BarelySentientAI

Insuring something very likely to happen and possibly very costly if it does is, rather unsurprisingly, expensive.

csh57

Hoenir said:

Where's the rip off though? 

The cost of the premiums when they then wont pay out if theres a claim 

csh57

BarelySentientAI said:

Insuring something very likely to happen and possibly very costly if it does is, rather unsurprisingly, expensive.

yes i appreciate that but too many are paying high premiums and not having their claim accepted, also many older people have conditions that are not likely to happen .... 

BarelySentientAI

csh57 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

Insuring something very likely to happen and possibly very costly if it does is, rather unsurprisingly, expensive.

yes i appreciate that but too many are paying high premiums and not having their claim accepted, also many older people have conditions that are not likely to happen .... 

Those are anecdotes.

Only about 1/3 of complaints (of all types) about travel insurance are upheld.  The data doesn't split any further to see how many were "older people" unfortunately.

Paying a high premium doesn't guarantee that a claim would be accepted - you're only covered for what the policy says.

TELLIT01

As long as ALL medical conditions, and changes to medical status after taking out the policy, are reported there shouldn't be any problem in getting paid.  Most problems seem to stem from people thinking a condition from several years ago doesn't need to be included.  Unless the insurer states that they only want medical history for the past x years, everything needs to be reported. 

DullGreyGuy

csh57 said:

Hoenir said:

Where's the rip off though? 

The cost of the premiums when they then wont pay out if theres a claim 

The reality is that insurers do pay out if there is a claim in line with the terms of the policy but like S75 of the CCA there is a lot of misunderstanding of what insurance actually covers or what actually needs to be declared etc. 

If you look through here you will find hundreds of threads where the person says their claim was declined because they didnt declare when they X (eg inner ear infection) 3 months before taking the policy out "because they didnt think it counted" despite being to the GP and getting a course of antibiotics. The question is typically straightforward - anything in 2 years you've had symptoms of, been prescribed medicine for or spoke to a medical professional about. 

You get people trying to claim when they were drunk and denied boarding, their airline cancels their flight, they didnt realise they needed a visa etc etc etc which are all things not covered. Similarly police pays out for delays for over 12hours. They were delayed for 11hrs 45mins and so claim declined as thats not over 12 hours. 

Unfortunately with all these things the person posting on a review board is likely to omit the details that say it's really their fault or at a minimum its understanding that something thats not covered isn't paid out. 83% of all travel claims are paid out and that considers all of those spurious claims that were never going to be covered. Of those 17% that then complain to the ombudsman about 1/3 does the ombudsman fully or partially agree with the customer (and partially agree can be the claim was correctly declined but they were too slow in making the decision or comms weren't great so some token inconvenience payment. 

So either the majority of legitimate claims are paid out or NGOs created under statute are actually in the pocket of big industry and able to hoodwink the auditors etc (ie your a conspiracy theorist) 

<gets off soapbox>

marcia_

 I take most reviews with a pinch of salt.
 Most people only leave reviews when they have a complaint and a much smaller amount if they had a good experience. 

sheramber

 you're only covered for what the policy says.

That applies to all insurance policies.  They are not going to cover you for something that is not on the policy.


It is up to you read the policy document carefully and to answer the medical question truthfully- not what you think might or might not be important- so you know exactly what you are covered for.  If you don't understand or are not sure about something themn ask the company.

We have had people asking on here if , when the question asks for details of all GP visits in the last X years, if the visit they made last year needs to be included because it was for a minor condition which has cleared up now.

People omit things like that then find they are not covered because they didn't answer the question correctly.

Medical conditions are risk assessed on the likely hood of a claim arising for treatment abroad. That assessment is based on all claims, not just your experience.


A friend had consulted his GP with what was diagnosed as gallbladder trouble  but no treatment was given,   which was declared on his travel insurance policy.

While on holiday abroad he  became very ill and was taken to hospital where his  gallbladder was removed.  All medical costs were covered as he had declared that visit.

If he had not declared it it would have been a costly experience.

dunstonh

Insurers will pay out for the things that you are covered for.  They wont pay out for things that are not covered.   All travel insurance policies are different.    You could effectively place them into three categories: budget, standard and comprehensive.   They are not official classifications but you should think of them that way.   

If you buy a budget plan with lots of restrictions then you should not be surprised when the insurer refuses to pay out on something that it would not cover.    Its all very well giving the insurer a bad review but the reality is that the fault is with the buyer.  Not the insurer.

Bad reviews on financial providers not paying out are often because the buyer didn't get it right.  Not the insurer.