Travel insurance changed forever?

11
Posted 6th Apr
In starting a claim I saw this on my insurers front page:

From 00:01 on 17 March 2020, all policies purchased after this date will no longer provide cover for claims directly or indirectly related to a pandemic and/or epidemic, notably at this time Coronavirus (COVID-19) including any related and/or similar condition(s) howsoever called or any mutation of these.

I can understand from a business perspective but it places a potential heavy cost to the individual or the state in, for example, repatriating citizens.

Wonder if this is going to be widespread in the industry now.
Community Updates
Misc

Groups

11 Comments
All travel insurances are stating this now.

Your countries Government will help, so no stress I guess.
Did the people who didn’t have insurance get any refunds?
Expect also job contracts to be adjusted to state that the company can give unpaid leave at any notice as well
This is what annoys me about insurance. The whole point of getting insurance is to cover you for something happening. In the case of travel insurance, covering you for something that prevents travel. I don't see why there should be a general pandemic exclusion. I can see the argument for a higher premium, as they now consider pandemics to be more likely as we have had/are in one. But pandemics unrelated to Corona should just be based on risk and therefore premium based not excluded outright!
seatie06/04/2020 14:40

This is what annoys me about insurance. The whole point of getting …This is what annoys me about insurance. The whole point of getting insurance is to cover you for something happening. In the case of travel insurance, covering you for something that prevents travel. I don't see why there should be a general pandemic exclusion. I can see the argument for a higher premium, as they now consider pandemics to be more likely as we have had/are in one. But pandemics unrelated to Corona should just be based on risk and therefore premium based not excluded outright!



I think what you are looking for, if you were looking for a holiday to book right now but concerned about Convid 19 would be a special Convid 19 policy.

Normal travel insurance covers, well, normal problems you might encounter.

If the policies still included Convid 19 you would end up paying a fortune!

You might need a so called "immunity passport" before you can return to work, you might need one to enter another country in the near future!
seatie06/04/2020 14:40

This is what annoys me about insurance. The whole point of getting …This is what annoys me about insurance. The whole point of getting insurance is to cover you for something happening. In the case of travel insurance, covering you for something that prevents travel. I don't see why there should be a general pandemic exclusion. I can see the argument for a higher premium, as they now consider pandemics to be more likely as we have had/are in one. But pandemics unrelated to Corona should just be based on risk and therefore premium based not excluded outright!


I think excluding Covid-19 is different to excluding all pandemics.

Covid-19 is very much known about, if you book a holiday now, you know there is a decent chance it will get disrupted in 2020. Therefore insurer is saying you shouldn't be booking travel that might get disrupted by Covid-19 and if you do, we won't pay out.
jon81uk06/04/2020 14:58

I think excluding Covid-19 is different to excluding all …I think excluding Covid-19 is different to excluding all pandemics.Covid-19 is very much known about, if you book a holiday now, you know there is a decent chance it will get disrupted in 2020. Therefore insurer is saying you shouldn't be booking travel that might get disrupted by Covid-19 and if you do, we won't pay out.


The way I read the original post they are saying they won't cover "a pandemic". It also then goes on to specifically refer to covid. So I read it as all Pandemics excluded, including anything related to covid.
I understand why they won't cover Covid now it is here but to exclude all others that haven't even happened yet. That is the point of insurance- to cover yourself for what could happen.
Edited by: "seatie" 6th Apr
J4GG406/04/2020 13:51

Expect also job contracts to be adjusted to state that the company can …Expect also job contracts to be adjusted to state that the company can give unpaid leave at any notice as well


And so begins the slow dismantling of employee protections.
Verbal.Kint06/04/2020 16:30

And so begins the slow dismantling of employee protections.


Already happened during this covid19 nightmare. So many employers told employees to go home for 4 to 8 weeks unpaid prior to the government coming out and saying they'll cover 80%. I have told my friends to never forget what they did to them.
seatie06/04/2020 16:13

The way I read the original post they are saying they won't cover "a …The way I read the original post they are saying they won't cover "a pandemic". It also then goes on to specifically refer to covid. So I read it as all Pandemics excluded, including anything related to covid.I understand why they won't cover Covid now it is here but to exclude all others that haven't even happened yet. That is the point of insurance- to cover yourself for what could happen.


Correct, they are placing not only a pandemic but also an epidemic exclusion.

The premise of insurance is to cover in the event of unforeseen problems, but they are effectively saying this or similar will happen in the future and we want no part of it. Insuring the life of a terminal ill person we can accept is plain stupid from a profit perspective but this something on the scale of Covid 19 has not happened since the Spanish flu of over a 100 years ago and we have naturally got better at solving the problem.
J4GG406/04/2020 16:37

Already happened during this covid19 nightmare. So many employers told …Already happened during this covid19 nightmare. So many employers told employees to go home for 4 to 8 weeks unpaid prior to the government coming out and saying they'll cover 80%. I have told my friends to never forget what they did to them.


Yeah, nasty stuff happened to my niece, only a pub job but it was her only income. Talking of which, Tim Martin did exactly that to his staff while he sits prettily on his millions.

Have they taken the employees back on then straight back off on furlough?
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Discussions