Insights for consumers
If you rely on complimentary travel insurance through your credit card, make sure you meet all eligibility requirements. A common condition is that you must hold a return ticket before you leave the country. If you don’t, your policy may not activate, and you may not be covered if something goes wrong.
Always read the policy wording carefully, check activation criteria, and answer questions accurately, so you can understand when and how cover starts and what is excluded.
One-way departure, late return ticket
Ana planned a trip to Europe in May 2025. Before leaving, she activated her credit card’s complimentary travel insurance through her bank’s website. She had pre-existing medical conditions and wanted to ensure she was covered. During the activation process, Ana was asked if she held a return ticket. She answered ‘yes’ even though she had not actually purchased a return ticket before departing New Zealand on 6 May 2025.
Ana intended returning on 2 July 2025, but did not buy her return ticket until 29 June 2025, with a flight booked for 4 July 2025. When her sister later joined her overseas, Ana extended her trip to 22 July 2025. She notified the insurer, who confirmed the extension was acceptable because it was within 90 days of her departure.
Injury at the airport and claim lodged
On 22 July 2025, while walking to her departure gate at Frankfurt Airport, Ana tripped and injured her ankle. Airline staff called paramedics, who advised her not to board the flight and go to hospital instead. Ana’s husband contacted the insurer, and Ana began corresponding with them about her claim.
Insurer discovers there was no return ticket at departure
As part of the claim assessment, the insurer asked for Ana’s original return ticket, and she confirmed that she had initially travelled on a one-way ticket.
Two days later, the insurer declined the claim, explaining that Ana’s policy was never activated because she did not hold a return ticket before leaving New Zealand. Ana had to pay for her medical treatment herself. She then complained to FSCL.
Why FSCL agreed the claim could be declined
We found that the insurer was entitled to decline Ana’s claim because the policy required travellers to hold a return ticket before departure for cover to apply. Although Ana intended to return and later bought a ticket, this did not meet the condition at the time she left New Zealand. The insurer’s question: ‘Do you hold a return ticket for your trip?’ was in the present tense, so Ana’s answer should have been ‘no.’ Had she done so, her application to cover her pre-existing medical conditions would have been rejected.
No unreasonable delay in the insurer’s decision
We also considered whether delays in assessing the claim added to Ana’s stress. We concluded that the insurer responded within a reasonable timeframe by advising her of the decision two days after the accident. While Ana’s situation was understandably stressful, the response time did not amount to poor claims handling.
Outcome
Balancing fairness to both parties, we concluded the insurer acted within the terms of the insurance contract. The complaint was not upheld.
Ana agreed to discontinue her complaint, and we closed our file.
