Travellers hurt on holiday have insurance claims unfairly booted out - because insurers accuse them of being drunk
Over the limit: Insurance companies cannot simply jump to the conclusion that someone was tipsy even if they admit to having had one or two glasses of wine
Travellers who are hurt while on holiday are having insurance claims unfairly booted out — because insurers accuse them of being drunk.
Insurance companies are allowed to reject claims from travellers who injure themselves while under the influence of alcohol.
But they cannot simply jump to the conclusion that someone was tipsy if they’ve been out for a meal, at a wedding or even if they had admitted they have had one or two glasses of wine.
So worried is the independent Financial Ombudsman Service that travellers may be having legitimate complaints rejected that it has issued a warning to insurance companies.
In one case, a tourist was injured crossing a road when they were hit by a car.
But because they had been for a meal and had admitted to drinking alcohol, the insurer refused to pay for medical treatment.
But the ombudsman told the insurance company to pay up because the traveller was not to blame for the accident and had not been excessively drunk.
Insurers can ask for blood tests from hospitals to ascertain whether someone was intoxicated when they suffered an injury. But the ombudsman said this was often not happening, and firms were just jumping to conclusions.
A spokesman says: ‘In the absence of evidence from blood alcohol tests, we still look to see what evidence the insurer relied on when they made their decision — including evidence from witnesses and CCTV footage if appropriate.’
The ombudsman says some firms are also flouting new rules that mean insurers cannot reject claims on the grounds a customer has not given them full information, if the company has failed to ask specific questions.
Under the terms of the Consumer Insurance Bill, it is up to insurers to ensure policyholders have told the truth.
But the Ombudsman highlighted how policyholders who have been forced to cancel holidays after their loved ones fell ill had had their claims rejected by their insurers.
This is because the firms argued that the customers should have disclosed their relative’s health history at the time they bought the policy.