Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello all,   I ordered a laptop online about 16 months ago. The laptop was faulty and I was supposed to send it back within guarantee but didn't for various reasons. I contacted the company a few months later and they said they will still fix it for me free of charge but I'd have to pay to send it to them and they will pay to send it back to me. The parcel arrived there fine. Company had fixed it and they sent it via dpd. I was working in the office so I asked my neighbours who would be in, as there's been a history of parcel thefts on our street. I had 2 neighbours who offered but when I went to update delivery instructions, their door number wasn't on the drop down despite sharing the same post code.  I then selected a neighbour who I thought would likely be in and also selected other in the safe place selection and put the number of the neighbour who I knew would definitely be in and they left my parcel outside and the parcel was stolen. DPD didn't want to deal with me and said I need to speak to the retailer. The retailer said DPD have special instructions from them not to leave a parcel outside unless specified by a customer. The retailer then said they could see my instructions said leave in a safe space but I have no porch. My front door just opens onto the road and the driver made no attempt to conceal it.  Anyway, I would like to know if I have rights here because the delivery wasn't for an item that I just bought. It was initially delivered but stopped working within the warranty period and they agreed to fix it for free.  Appreciate your help 🙏🏼   Thanks!
    • As the electric carmaker sees sales fall and cuts jobs, we take a closer look at its problems.View the full article
    • Care to briefly tell someone who isn't tech savvy - i.e. me! - how you did this? Every day is a school day.
    • Hi Guys, well a year on and my friend has just received this in the post today, obviously a little scared so looking for more of your advice.  Letter from the NCC dated 1-May-2024 is as follows.......   Before deputy district judge Haythorne sitting at the national business centre, 4th floor st Kathrine's house Northampton Upon reading an application from the claimant  it is ordered that  1. The claim be sent to the county court at #### (Friends local Court) Because this order has been made without a hearing, the parties have the right to apply to have the order set aside, varied or stayed.  A party making such an application must send or deliver the application to the court (together with any appropriate fee) to arrive within seven days of service of this order.  If the application is one which requires a hearing, and a) the party making the application is the defendant: and b) the defendant is an individual, then upon filing of the application the claim will be transferred to the defendants home court.  In all other cases requiring a hearing the claim will be transferred to the preferred court.    As a result of an order made on the 1 May 2024, this claim has been transferred to the county court at ##### (friends local court) 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Help! cancellation claim refused because father taken ill "not resident in uk"


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5847 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

:mad: Hi, please help! I had to cancel my holiday last summer as my father suffered a devastating stroke the day before my departure. I rushed to his bed-side in Italy where he resides and he died two days later. I informed immediately my travel insurance company, Option Insurance, who advised me to put in a claim on my return. I did this. I explained all the circumstamces and all seemed fine. I was sent a very detailed questionnaire and medical form which had to be filled in by my late father GP.

To obtrain this and his death certificate I had to travel to Italy. I incurred this extra cost as the holiday I had to cancel was an expensive safari to Kenya.

After I had sent the documents off, I have now received a letter from Inter Group Claims Services informing me that the claim cannot proceed as my insurance policy in the definition of "Relative" includes only relatives residing in the UK.

Since my first approach to the insurance company I had made clear my father was in Italy, but nobody had pointed out this clause to me before (but which is printed in the booklet).

I wonder if this exclusion of relatives living abroad in the EU is acceptable under our European rights? As an Italian living in the Uk for the last 10 years I have regularly renewed this yearly travel indurance with Options never knowing that the level of cover provided to me was inadequate as most of my relatives still live in Italy.

Do I have any ground to contest?

Thank you if you can help me

Unhappy Italian Lady

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to Insurance Companies Forum :)

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... Strictly speaking, they are totally right, of course, as travel insurance covers residents and their circumstances in the UK, and when your circumstances are different from the average, it is really up to you to check that you are covered for everything that may deviate from the norm. The fact that you were advised on the phone to claim on your return is neither here nor there, frankly, are you telling me that if you had been advised straight away that you wouldn't be covered, you would have gone to Kenya instead of Italy to your father's deathbed? Somehow, I don't think so.

 

As for the death certificate and report, there are plenty of ways to get those done which do not necessarily involve a trip there, so I don't think you can really use that either.

 

The reason is of course that when it comes to costings, a repat/curtailment to be arranged could vary too wildly in costs if they had to pay for relatives to go everywhere in the world. I do however feel that in this case, if all you are claiming for is the cancellation of your holiday, whether your relative was here or elsewhere makes no difference to their costs.

 

I don't know what you are trying to claim for, but if it is more than the cost of your cancelled holiday, it might be worth changing your claim to only that and point out what I have said as regards their costs. If they still refuse to consider it, then your only option is the Ombudsman, but whether they will accept that you have a valid argument or not, I can't say. If you never queried in the last 10 years whether your cover was actually adequate, I feel that you have to largely take responsability for this.

 

Some insurances won't specify that relatives are to be in the UK, so it might be worth hunting around, and make sure you read the wording throroughly yourself before taking the insurance, don't take the word of an agent who probably won't know the exact terms or wording on each policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a look at the policy wording, and this is what it says in the definitions section: "

 

'RELATIVE'

Brother, brother-in-law, common law partner, daughter, daughter-in-law, fiancé(e), grandchild, grandparent,legal guardian, parent, parent-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, son, son-in-law or spouse living in the UK.

 

So, it does specify that to be classed as a relative, the person has to be currently living in the UK. Nationality is irrelevant.

http://www.optionsinsurance.co.uk/scheme/policywording6.pdf

 

 

On page 23 it says that you are covered if you have to cancel a trip because of a relative living abroad falling ill, but only if you were planning to stay with them:

 

 

 

2 The death, injury or illness of a Relative, close Business Associate, a person with whom You have

booked to travel or a Relative or friend living abroad with whom You plan to stay.

 

 

 

 

Cases like these highlight the importance of checking the policy wording to make sure the cover meets your needs. If you buy insurance online, you can often download and read the actual wording before you even enter your details to obtain a quote.

 

Once you take out a policy, you are deemed to have agreed to the terms and conditions, regardless of whether you have read them.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

LemonTwist,

 

How much was your cancellation claim for?

 

Technically speaking you are bound by the policy wording, however they do not have to read this to you as the onus is on yourself to check that the policy meets your criteria etc.

 

You can appeal against the decision to decline your claim to the relevant managing director. If you do not accept their reason you can then approach the Ombudsman (this does not cost you anything). Depending on the amount of your claim they may pay your claim rather than risking the ombudsman siding with yourself (as this costs the insurer).

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this case I think it would be very unlikely that the ombudsman would side with the policyholder, as the definition of "relative" is specified clearly in the policy. I don't think it is likely that an insurer would pay a claim just because they are afraid the ombudsman might side with the policyholder - if they know they are in the right they will stick to their decision to decline the claim regardless.

 

As the policyholder has had the policy for 10 years, I imagine the ombudsman would expect her to know what she is covered for. I've had a look at a couple of other policy wordings - the 2 policies that I looked at didn't specify that a relative has to live in the UK, so I think in this case they chose the wrong insurer.

 

She says that nobody pointed out the exclusion to her when she bought the policy, but I don't think she can say the policy was mis-sold. The salesperson can't be expected to point out every single aspect of the terms and conditions, otherwise the phone call would need to last for a very long time!

 

Anyone has the right to go to the ombudsman once they have exhausted the company's internal complaints procedure, but in this case I really don't think it would be worthwhile. The ombudsman service was set up to help people who have been treated unfairly by companies. I think that if people lodge a complaint purely out of spite for a company, it will simply slow the system down for people who have genuinely been treated unfairly by their insurer.

 

Of course I feel sorry for what has happened to the original poster, but I really do think people should try to take more care when selecting a policy, particularly if you have special circumstances or if it is a non-standard risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest Old_andrew2018

Hi

I have to agree your policy states resident in the UK, however I think there is a chancge of the insurance company reassessing you claim

this is a letter I wrote to an insurance company altered slightly here

I hope it is usful, in addition take a look at this link to an adjudication

by the FSO it is similar to your case however the relative (mother) was resident in kenya, and the son on holiday in Holland

Travel Insurance - case studies

Lemon Twist if you are still on line if so can you comment on the link and precedent (if there is one) and kindly edit this letter I am not a natural writer you will understand

 

Your name

Address 01

Address 02

 

Date

 

 

Insurance Company

Address

Dear Sir or madam

Complaint

Re: - insert your policy number

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated insert date, regarding my claim, made on a Annual Insurance Policy, I note that Insert companies name intend to reject this claim.

I ask that you reconsider this decision, as I have at all times acted in good faith, and conscientiously,

am I correct in noting that if my father had been resident in the United Kingdom then my claim would have succeeded?

I feel that this is in fact unfair, and your company chooses to rely on this term and condition (resident in the UK) in order to reject claims, this is an unusual condition.

I have since looked at terms, and conditions, for other companies providing travel insurance, whilst I have to agree definition of who they consider to be close relatives is quite similar I have not found any reference that requires then to be resident in the United Kingdom.

I await your response, may I take this opportunity to thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter.

Yours Faithfully

 

 

 

Insert Your name

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Guest Old_andrew2018
sorry I must add that it is worth waiting to see if a member can edit the letter,

hi

not heard anything for a while have you been succesful

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the advice and the text of the letter. I will try to send it to Options and see what comes of it.

 

Just this may interest you: my boyfriend who was to go on holiday with me, is insured with axa, and they are also turning the claim down.

 

Axa has no clause excluding relatives abroad, however, they quote "pre existing conditions".

 

My father being 82 years old was on stable doses of cardiovascular medication for years, as most people are at that age. He had suffered 2 minor hart attacks in his late 50s and a very minor ischemic epoisode two years ago which left no consequences to his health.

 

Before the stroke suddenly killed him, he was in good health (as his doctor specified in the medical form I had to have filled in). He had recently been on a week holiday touring Norway and before then, touring Spain. The week preceeding the stroke he had been working full time on the family farm. Hardly a sick man. AXA however, because of the medication, claim "pre existing conditions".

 

What can he do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a lot. Whether your father was a sick man or not or had the same medication that "most people" get at that age (a sweeping generalisation, incidentally), it was up to your boyfriend to declare what pre-existing conditions your father had or didn't have, as it would have influenced the insurer's decision whether to insure him or not and/or whether to increase the premium.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018
Thank you for the advice and the text of the letter. I will try to send it to Options and see what comes of it.

 

Just this may interest you: my boyfriend who was to go on holiday with me, is insured with axa, and they are also turning the claim down.

 

Axa has no clause excluding relatives abroad, however, they quote "pre existing conditions".

 

My father being 82 years old was on stable doses of cardiovascular medication for years, as most people are at that age. He had suffered 2 minor hart attacks in his late 50s and a very minor ischemic epoisode two years ago which left no consequences to his health.

 

Before the stroke suddenly killed him, he was in good health (as his doctor specified in the medical form I had to have filled in). He had recently been on a week holiday touring Norway and before then, touring Spain. The week preceeding the stroke he had been working full time on the family farm. Hardly a sick man. AXA however, because of the medication, claim "pre existing conditions".

 

What can he do?

he must look at the Financial services ombudsman web site there are case studies, look at them as you will see over 60% of all complaints win their case some complaint were very similar to both yours and your boyfrindx Travel Insurance - case studies

 

The ombudsman service will only act once you have exhusted the insurance companies own complaints procedure

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Your boyfriend could always try arguing that he had no knowledge of your father's medical condition and therefore was in no position to disclose them to the insurer. He can only be expected to declare that which he has knowledge of and, as your father isn't his close relative, they may accept this.

21/8/06 Intelligent Finance - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)

1/9/06 Intelligent Finance Prelim Approach letter requesting refund of £319 charges

10/9/06 Intelligent Finance LBA sent

26/9/06 Moneyclaim Online filed - £385.88

12/10/06 Settlement of £415.88

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your boyfriend could always try arguing that he had no knowledge of your father's medical condition and therefore was in no position to disclose them to the insurer. He can only be expected to declare that which he has knowledge of and, as your father isn't his close relative, they may accept this.

 

I don't think that's a very good idea. Even though the 2 heart attacks were minor and had no lasting effects, they are still considered to be "material facts" and would need to be disclosed to the insurer, particularly as he was taking medication for them. Also, if the couple live together, it seems likely that they would have talked about the father's medical condition at least once?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I had a reply and the insurer still refuses to accept my claim, now for 2 reasons: the non uk residence of my father and the pre-existing condition.

The whole story makes me feel bad, so I am giving up on this one. I regret having paid insurance for many years for nothing, so to avoid further disappointment I am not taking out any further travel insurance, nor I will in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018

If that was their final reply/answer, you have an oppertunity to take it to

the financial ombudsman, in a couple of links I gave you there are case studies, I think you have a good chance of success in the case quoted in the link they found for the complainant.

It is a free service for members of the public, I believe that the insurance companies are levied.

A relative using the service was awarded compensation.

I am aware that it is indeed your decision, I really suggest you do complain to them.

Travel Insurance - case studies

 

Regards

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for not taking travel insurance in the future, sorry, but that is one of the dumbest things I have heard in a long time.

 

Let me put this in perspective for you with a few random examples:

1 day inpatient in a Spanish clinic - £500. If it has to be in ICU, £1000.

Repatriation by air ambulance from a European country - STARTS at £25k.

Broken leg - 2 extra seats needed to keep leg elevated if you can get on your original flight, otherwise, 3 seats needing to be purchased + transport at both ends.

 

Need I go on? Unless you have considerable private means, despite your anger at the insurance company here, I would strongly advise you to rethink this and next time, make sure that you take an insurance which

appropriately covers your needs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018

thats good advice I've a colleague who has recently beaten cancer they have travel insurance, however the cancer and associated problems (for want of a better word) aren’t covered, however an accident, theft, and anyother loss is still covered.

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with Bookworm - not taking travel insurance is madness.

 

When I was involved in air-ambulance and repatriation work, I took part in the repat of a number of uninsured patients. Even though we tried to keep the costs down, in every case the funding needed caused major problems for the patients and their families.

 

The key is to shop around well ahead of travel, read the documents carefully to make sure the cover is what you need. Many insurers will vary the cover if asked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I agree totally with the others about taking out travel insurance. I handle medical emergencies and repatriations over £100,000 for an insurer. Believe me, when you get ill in USA you wanna make sure you're insured. I've had cases where uninsured customers and their relatives have had to sell their homes to fund their treatment and air ambulance home.

21/8/06 Intelligent Finance - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)

1/9/06 Intelligent Finance Prelim Approach letter requesting refund of £319 charges

10/9/06 Intelligent Finance LBA sent

26/9/06 Moneyclaim Online filed - £385.88

12/10/06 Settlement of £415.88

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...