Change in Platinum Card Travel Insurance?

[greenfrog86]

AMEX are a business and need to make a profit. If a lot of people are claiming on their TI and the insurer (ACE) puts up their premiums, then the T&C must be adjusted to compensate. They have given over 3 months notice, are still covering people for travel in the meantime and people have the option to cancel their cards and take out alternative insurance. This is a devaluation of the card benefits but might be necessary under the circumstances.

Working for a bank I understand your comments and the obvious commercial interest for Amex however this really takes away one of the best features of the card that distinguished it in the market.

If they had simply changed their card to meet the offering of most of their competitors (as Citibank did when they halved their QFF point earn on the Platinum Rewards card) then I would understand, however this card is THE MOST EXPENSIVE card (Centurion excluded as it is not publicly available to the 'mass market') in the Australian market and a lot of the other features can now be gained through other cards...

 

[yo yo ma]

Yes, I agree that they have culled the benefit significantly and will lose a lot of clients over it.

 

[aplmac]

Yes, I agree that they have culled the benefit significantly and will lose a lot of clients over it.

I think this exercise has shown that AMEX, as a brand, is no more now than just another piece of financial plastic. When I joined AMEX in the UK nearly 30 years ago, it was a brand that had status and one that you aspired to have. Back then, VISA and MC were little more than 'international' symbols on glorified cheque guarantee cards issued by whomever you banked with. AMEX you had to apply for, meet criteria, wasn't issued by a bank...

Nowadays, VISA and MC have made up the ground and then some, are more widely accepted than AMEX, and are also bundled with a raft of ancillary 'benefits'. Gold and Platinum are now just differentiating colours these days, and no-one bats an eye any more wether you give gold, silver, green, yellow, red, white, plain or patterned, just as long as it's good for the money. It's just plastic all the same nowadays.

Whilst VISA and MC have attracted clientele by adding benefits at low costs because of the broader competitive market space they are in, AMEX has gone and reduced benefits and only attracts clientele through the perceived status you get from being able to afford to 'buy-in' to a card that costs you more than equivalent bank plastic, gives you less in return, and often costs you more to use with the additional surcharge where it's accepted! Whereas before it was a statement of 'having made it', it is now a symbol of fiscal irresponsibility rather than sound financial management. That's why I've now canned mine.

 

[Stephen65]

AMEX are a business and need to make a profit. If a lot of people are claiming on their TI and the insurer (ACE) puts up their premiums, then the T&C must be adjusted to compensate. They have given over 3 months notice, are still covering people for travel in the meantime and people have the option to cancel their cards and take out alternative insurance. This is a devaluation of the card benefits but might be necessary under the circumstances.

The difficulty is that what they have done goes far beyond a simple necessary adjustment of the terms to reduce the cost of claims such as introducing a deductible. In particular:

1. Poor and inconsistent drafting of the new terms means there is real doubt and uncertainty as to whether you are covered at all in many common situations.

2. The exclusions for so-called "Special Sports" and for Pre-existing Medical Condition are now by far the widest I have ever seen in a travel insurance policy again meaning you are not covered in many situations where other policies do cover you or introducing real uncertainty as to the scope of the exclusions.

3. The requirement that you pay for all forms of transport on your trip by Amex card in order to have transport accident insurance is completely unworkable. Fair enough while I am flying because all airlines take Amex but why should my cover switch on and off depending on whether a taxi or bus takes Amex?

4. This is the most expensive card you can directly apply for in Australia and accordingly, especially given all the noise I hear from Amex about how high status it is, I would expect it to have a very good travel insurance policy not one of the worst. What we have ended up with is a poverty pack offering that cannot be relied upon.

It's almost like someone at Amex set out to try and discourage as many people as possible from renewing the card.

 

[awilcockson]

4. This is the most expensive card you can directly apply for in Australia and accordingly, especially given all the noise I hear from Amex about how high status it is, I would expect it to have a very good travel insurance policy not one of the worst. What we have ended up with is a poverty pack offering that cannot be relied upon.

It's almost like someone at Amex set out to try and discourage as many people as possible from renewing the card.

I couldn't have said it better myself. It didn't take a rocket scientist to read the response I got to my email and interpret it as "bugger off then if you don't want the card, we don't really care and we are silly enough to think that there is still plenty of suckers out there that will pay the massive fee due to the 'prestige' of a card that you can't even use in a lot of places".

 

[lovetravellingoz]

I agree that they are entitled to change, BUT we have already paid for our insurance a year in advance.

Morally what should have happened is that the change apply on renewal.

 

[yo yo ma]

The requirement that you pay for all forms of transport on your trip by Amex card in order to have transport accident insurance is completely unworkable. Fair enough while I am flying because all airlines take Amex but why should my cover switch on and off depending on whether a taxi or bus takes Amex?

Some excellent points - particularly this one you have highlighted. It should only be the flights that count.

 

[aschmid]

I'm not convinced about that - my reading of the letter (and it is a bit ambiguous) is:

1) The changes apply to any trips that you book after 15th June (OK - that's straightforward enough),

2) The changes apply to any trips booked prior (to 15th June I assume, from the start date of the new Master Policy I also assume) but for which you still need to pay a deposit. (Which I interpret as meaning are NOT covered under the old T&C)

The text on my letter reads:

The changes apply to any trips the you book after 15 June 2012; or trips booked prior, but for which you still have to pay a deposit.

As you said the first point is clear all trips booked prior to 15 June 2012 are covered.

The second part (underlined) means to me that trips book prior to 15 June which have not been paid in full will NOT be covered. That's back to the T&C that you need to pay the full fare of your trip to your AMEX card to engage the insurance.

 

[Jane-Doe]

The difficulty is that what they have done goes far beyond a simple necessary adjustment of the terms to reduce the cost of claims such as introducing a deductible. In particular:

1. Poor and inconsistent drafting of the new terms means there is real doubt and uncertainty as to whether you are covered at all in many common situations.

2. The exclusions for so-called "Special Sports" and for Pre-existing Medical Condition are now by far the widest I have ever seen in a travel insurance policy again meaning you are not covered in many situations where other policies do cover you or introducing real uncertainty as to the scope of the exclusions.

3. The requirement that you pay for all forms of transport on your trip by Amex card in order to have transport accident insurance is completely unworkable. Fair enough while I am flying because all airlines take Amex but why should my cover switch on and off depending on whether a taxi or bus takes Amex?

4. This is the most expensive card you can directly apply for in Australia and accordingly, especially given all the noise I hear from Amex about how high status it is, I would expect it to have a very good travel insurance policy not one of the worst. What we have ended up with is a poverty pack offering that cannot be relied upon.

It's almost like someone at Amex set out to try and discourage as many people as possible from renewing the card.

a poverty pack with prestige

 

[equus]

or trips booked prior, but for which you still have to pay a deposit.

...... have not been paid in full will NOT be covered.

I have to disagree on that interpretation. The wording is convoluted, but clear - it says "still have to pay a deposit", not in full. As the current insurance only requires you to be a cardholder, and covers for events such as cancellation etc. there is no requirement to pay in full to activate insurance cover for a "trip". If nothing at all is paid, then it would be hard to see how there could be any loss to cover, so arguably no need for insurance cover to start - but as soon as even a deposit is paid, coverage is in place. Take for instance, a full points redemption trip for which nothing will ever be paid - that would clearly be covered.

There is no relevance to looking to the new T&C for the conditions to activate cover under the old terms - so "paid in full" doesn't come into it.

It would have been easy to word "but for which you have not paid in full by 15 June 2012" - but this is not the wording, and there is a good reason to give meaning to the wording chosen.

My interpretation (IANAL), is that as long as you have booked and paid a depost before 15 June 2012 you are covered under the old policy terms (that is if you can rely on the letter - if you only rely on the policy T&C, then you are no longer covered now unless you paid the full amount on the card, but that sort of retrospective removal of cover without notice would never stand up to a serious challenge).

 

[Timtammi]

I'm still waiting for the letter from Amex advising of the change. Any other still not been advised?

 

[straitman]

I'm still waiting for the letter from Amex advising of the change. Any other still not been advised?

Pick me. :evil:

 

[awilcockson]

Pick me. :evil:

And me! .

 

[greenfrog86]

Hopefully its all a bad dream and there is no letter on its way....

+1 to not receiving anything yet

 

[11sjw]

I'm still waiting for the letter from Amex advising of the change. Any other still not been advised?

Me too. :evil:

 

[bigmal]

Got it today

 

[Diesellife]

Spoke to ACE again - Any card (including supplementary) issued after 30/01/2012 will have the new T&C attached to it and be bound with the new master agreement immediately.

My in-law recently received my supplementary card and guess what - they will not be covered as they did not purchase the ticket on the card :-(

Existing card holders will 90 days grace period - so the date is adjusted to 15th June 2012.

 

[Flashback]

Don't worry guys ; mine was one of the last ones to be sent out in the UK... so I thought it would never come, but eventually it did!

 

[aschmid]

I have to disagree on that interpretation. The wording is convoluted, but clear - it says "still have to pay a deposit", not in full. As the current insurance only requires you to be a cardholder, and covers for events such as cancellation etc. there is no requirement to pay in full to activate insurance cover for a "trip". If nothing at all is paid, then it would be hard to see how there could be any loss to cover, so arguably no need for insurance cover to start - but as soon as even a deposit is paid, coverage is in place. Take for instance, a full points redemption trip for which nothing will ever be paid - that would clearly be covered.

There is no relevance to looking to the new T&C for the conditions to activate cover under the old terms - so "paid in full" doesn't come into it.

It would have been easy to word "but for which you have not paid in full by 15 June 2012" - but this is not the wording, and there is a good reason to give meaning to the wording chosen.

My interpretation (IANAL), is that as long as you have booked and paid a depost before 15 June 2012 you are covered under the old policy terms (that is if you can rely on the letter - if you only rely on the policy T&C, then you are no longer covered now unless you paid the full amount on the card, but that sort of retrospective removal of cover without notice would never stand up to a serious challenge).

I see your point it's a bit confusing. I thought about your comment on the full rewards booking where no payment is ever required. If you do that before 15th of June you'd be covered, also after but under the new insurance.

Thinking of it this could be relating to a scenario where you make a booking before 15th of June with let's say AMEX Platinum Travel but since you book e.g. 6 months ahead and tickets don't need to be issued you are actually not making a deposit (payment) before 15th of June. So in this scenario if you make a payment/deposit before 15th June you covered under old policy, if after you move over to the new one.

Could that be what they mean?

 

[LuisT]

Got my letter today, at the same time an offer that if I take up the plat business card and keep my personal plat card I'd get them for $600 each...

If the insurance was still there I probably would have considered it...