Insights for consumers
Travel insurance policies often have strict limits on what they cover when flights are delayed, rescheduled, or cancelled. If your airline changes your flight, check your policy before making alternative arrangements.
Booking new flights without consulting your insurer could mean your claim is declined. Always read your policy carefully and, even if you need to make a quick decision, contact your insurer before incurring extra costs.
Sally takes quick action after finding out her flight is rescheduled
Sally and her family arrived at Siem Reap airport to find their flight to Hanoi had been rescheduled to the next day due to operational requirements. Without contacting her insurer, Sally booked new flights to leave immediately so they would not miss planned activities in Hanoi. After returning home, she claimed the cost under her travel insurance.
The insurer says rescheduling flights is not covered
The insurer declined, explaining the policy did not cover the purchase of replacement flights. Sally complained to Financial Services Complaints Limited (FSCL), arguing that the reschedule should be covered and the insurer should reimburse her.
How did FSCL handle the complaint?
We contacted the insurer to find out more about the policy and why they declined Sally’s claim.
The insurer checked whether Sally’s situation was covered by the policy as an unforeseen cancellation.
The insurance cover excluded unforeseen circumstances due to a delayed, rescheduled or cancelled flight by an airline. We agreed that this part of the policy did not provide Sally cover for her situation.
Under the terms of the insurer’s policy, cover only applied if the airline did not provide a replacement flight within 36 hours of a delay.
FSCL finds that Sally is not covered
In Sally’s situation, the airline rescheduled the flight to the following day. As Sally chose to purchase new flights that would depart earlier, she was not covered by the policy.
Sally argues that the delay would have led to a claim for extra accommodation and meals
Sally said that if she had waited for the rescheduled flight offered by the airline, she might have been able to claim for accommodation and meals in Siem Reap, and for lost accommodation in Hanoi, since they would have been a day late. Sally asked the insurer, in the interests of fairness, to consider making an ex-gratia payment of $1,500, minus any excess, which she considered would cover the meals and accommodation, if she had made a claim for them.
Insurer says flight was rescheduled, not delayed
The insurer said that Sally would not have been entitled to claim for meals and accommodation due to travel delays, because the airline informed Sally of the rescheduled flight five days before the original flight was due to depart.
However, Sally said she did not realise the flights had been rescheduled until she arrived at the airport.
What was the outcome of FSCL’s investigation?
Although we agreed that the policy did not cover Sally’s situation, we asked the insurer about Sally’s request to cover the extra accommodation and meals. Although the insurer had found that the policy did not cover Sally’s claims, as a gesture of goodwill, they offered Sally $500 in final settlement of her complaint.
Sally was pleased to accept the insurer’s gesture of goodwill and discontinued her complaint. Sally felt she now understood more about how the policy would operate to cover her future travel plans.
