Opinions on how your travel insurance went in QF grounding on 29th

[eastwest101]

I am sure this will be interesting to see how different travel insurance providers coped with the QF grounding on the 29th. I realise any insurance claims may take a while to work through the system but am interested to see how good/bad the response was from diferent travel insurers.

I had read annecdotal evidence of at least one travel insurer whom weren't aware of which parts of QF were and weren't grounded.

 

[serfty]

Having departed on the last transPac flight out of Oz that Saturday, with an announcement made ¾ hours before arriving into DFW I had time to thoroughly scrutinise my insurance PDF before landing and decided I would be covered should my return flight not operate.

As it happened, Qantas would have looked after me in any case.

 

[Justchecking]

It'll depend on the compensation offered by QF for many, as most insurances will not pay if the money can be recouped from the airline. My own insurance precludes payment from insolvency of the airline and mechanical defect, I guess it's how the insurance company interprets a self inflicted grounding. Oh wait, striking is also an out clause in my insurance, no dice.

 

[serfty]

As posted elsewhere; you should always understand the PDS of the insurance you are using. I would have been covered for F&B with Lodging. I'm sure if I had used it the underwriters would consider extracting compensation from the carrier.

 

[equus]

I think it will be a moot point, as Qantas will cover anyway.

I was caught in Melbourne, on a day trip - no luggage at all, for a Wedding (whcih was Saturday morning, so no problems getting there). This was actually a quick trip from Sydney, where we were visiting, and then returning.

I knew that the Amex Plat Charge insurance would cover accommodation and food and beverage due to delay (or cancellation / denied boarding), so safe in this knowledge, booked hotel ASAP before everything disappeared (only Derby day in Melbourne, and the morning flight down was full of obvious racegoers, and one Tony Abbott as well).

I didn't have the PDS with me (not for a day trip), and had no luck finding the website link using the iPhone (only found broken links - should have browsed the AFF threads which have the link). Eventually (after no luck with the insurance number - they can only do claims, and don't have copies of the PDS ), got the concierge to email the correct link.

This confirmed what I suspected - emergency clothes (we only had what we we wore to the wedding, so not suitable for walking around on a long delay), would only be covered by "delayed baggage". I am not sure that arguing the baggage was delayed in Sydney (we were mid way through a multi-city booking, heading back to Sydney) would really work, as it was never checked to come with us to Melbourne anyway.

Having seen the initial Qantas offer, the plan was to get them to cover under "incidentals" anything we had to buy, and then use the Amex for food and beverage (hotel was going to be inside the QF limit), if Qantas wouldn't cover.

Have claimed everything via Qantas (actually hit twice, as was supposed to return to BNE on 30/10, separate PNR to the 29/10 MEL-SYD), and expect them to cover it all.

So, despite being happy with the Amex Plat Charge included insurance, I have stumbled into a gap in the cover, albeit, not one that I am particularly concerned about, but it just goes to show that you really need to know the details of the insurance coverage.

 

[markis10]

It'll depend on the compensation offered by QF for many, as most insurances will not pay if the money can be recouped from the airline. My own insurance precludes payment from insolvency of the airline and mechanical defect, I guess it's how the insurance company interprets a self inflicted grounding. Oh wait, striking is also an out clause in my insurance, no dice.

Actually a lot of travel insurance does not cover the airline deciding to ground or not operate a service if there is government intervention, including the one promoted on the QF website, QBE:

a loss caused by, arising directly or indirectly from or in any way connected with any Government intervention, prohibition, or regulation.

and

Cancellation or restriction of pre-paid scheduled public transport services caused by severe weather, natural disaster, riot, strike or civil commotion.

Its a moot point of course but I wonder how people would have gone, cannot help but think that first clause is a new one after recent events....

 

[Mal]

Anyone have any experience ex U.K./fra? Surely qf are on the hook of paying out significant ccompo based on EU regulations?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using AustFreqFly

 

[oz_mark]

Actually a lot of travel insurance does not cover the airline deciding to ground or not operate a service if there is government intervention, including the one promoted on the QF website, QBE: and Its a moot point of course but I wonder how people would have gone, cannot help but think that first clause is a new one after recent events....

You could argue that the grounding was due to a lack of government intervention, rather than a result of intervention.

I don't think it is a new clause though.

 

[oz_mark]

Anyone have any experience ex U.K./fra? Surely qf are on the hook of paying out significant ccompo based on EU regulations?

Yes, QF are, and I did see somewhere where they said they would be paying out in accordance with those regulations.

 

[amaroo]

Reading the fine print on our policy it reminds me of the recent legal definition of "flood" that many poor souls had to contend with recently.

Ours:-

We will not pay for - Transport Provider caused cancellations, delays or rescheduling other than when caused by strikes......was it caused by strikes? I would say yes, but I'm betting, I'd lose that one.

 

[amaroo]

I think it will be a moot point, as Qantas will cover anyway.

I was caught in Melbourne, on a day trip - no luggage at all, for a Wedding (whcih was Saturday morning, so no problems getting there). This was actually a quick trip from Sydney, where we were visiting, and then returning.

I knew that the Amex Plat Charge insurance would cover accommodation and food and beverage due to delay (or cancellation / denied boarding), so safe in this knowledge, booked hotel ASAP before everything disappeared (only Derby day in Melbourne, and the morning flight down was full of obvious racegoers, and one Tony Abbott as well).

I didn't have the PDS with me (not for a day trip), and had no luck finding the website link using the iPhone (only found broken links - should have browsed the AFF threads which have the link). Eventually (after no luck with the insurance number - they can only do claims, and don't have copies of the PDS ), got the concierge to email the correct link.

This confirmed what I suspected - emergency clothes (we only had what we we wore to the wedding, so not suitable for walking around on a long delay), would only be covered by "delayed baggage". I am not sure that arguing the baggage was delayed in Sydney (we were mid way through a multi-city booking, heading back to Sydney) would really work, as it was never checked to come with us to Melbourne anyway.

Having seen the initial Qantas offer, the plan was to get them to cover under "incidentals" anything we had to buy, and then use the Amex for food and beverage (hotel was going to be inside the QF limit), if Qantas wouldn't cover.

Have claimed everything via Qantas (actually hit twice, as was supposed to return to BNE on 30/10, separate PNR to the 29/10 MEL-SYD), and expect them to cover it all.

So, despite being happy with the Amex Plat Charge included insurance, I have stumbled into a gap in the cover, albeit, not one that I am particularly concerned about, but it just goes to show that you really need to know the details of the insurance coverage.

Have multiply CC insurance freebies however, I've never relied on them.

Also, for the people who missed cruise connections or other expensive items in the chain - are they being fully compensated?

 

[Justchecking]

Kind of makes , wonder what events they do pay out for.....volcanic ash maybe?

 

[serfty]

...
I didn't have the PDS with me (not for a day trip), and had no luck finding the website link using the iPhone (only found broken links - should have browsed the AFF threads which have the link). Eventually (after no luck with the insurance number - they can only do claims, and don't have copies of the PDS ), got the concierge to email the correct link. ...

I carry a copy of the .pdf on a USB stick.

(Fwiw ... and .pdf's other relevant documents such as e-tickets.)

 

[equus]

I carry a copy of the .pdf on a USB stick.

(Fwiw ... and .pdf's other relevant documents such as e-tickets.)

I keep it on the laptop, which in this event I left in Sydney, as I didn't want to carry it for a quick day trip when I would have no chance to use it.

Looks like I need to be better prepared for contingencies, and follow your lead and keep it on the USB stick and bring it anyway. Would then just need to access a PC. Interestingly, the QP was closed at MEL as soon as the grounding was taking effect (at least that was the information being given at the security screening). I had thought to go through security, and use the QP for PC access to arrange accommodation, and have a drink or too before heading off (I had a boarding pass after all), but security were not going to let anyone through without a JQ or QFLink ticket, so I didn't bother checking for myself whether the lounge was actually closed (I imagine there would have been a lot of annoyed QFLink passengers if it had been).

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Reading the fine print on our policy it reminds me of the recent legal definition of "flood" that many poor souls had to contend with recently.

Ours:-

We will not pay for - Transport Provider caused cancellations, delays or rescheduling other than when caused by strikes......was it caused by strikes? I would say yes, but I'm betting, I'd lose that one.

no. the grounding was not caused by the strike for the purposes of any insurance claims.

 

[eastwest101]

I know there are a number of different views about newslimited here, but note that this particular article was published 4 days before the 29th Oct.


THE AUSTRALIAN 25th Oct 2011 Angela Saurine

TRAVELLERS whose Qantas flights are cancelled due to strikes may not be covered by travel insurance because of widespread media coverage of the industrial action. Some insurance providers have disclaimers warning there is no provision to claim for any expenses relating to the strikes for policies issued on or after September 28.
"All travel insurance policies provide cover for unforeseen and unexpected circumstances only," a statement for major insurer Allianz Global Assistance Australia said.
Its ruling applies to all travel insurance policies issued before October 13, with policies booked after that date assessed individually.

Insurance Council of Australia spokesman Campbell Fuller said the situation varied from policy to policy and holidaymakers should read their travel insurance policy carefully to see how an issue like industrial action was treated.

"In some policies the reasons for cancellation of an airline flight, giving rise to a travel insurance claim, may need to be 'unforeseen' - check with your insurer about how your policy will operate if your flight is cancelled due to protracted and predictable industrial action," he said.

Travel insurance compensates a traveller for a loss incurred as a result of defined events and travellers disrupted as a result of a cancelled airline flight must have incurred a loss in order to make a claim.
"Generally, if an airline rebooks the traveller on a different flight, or pays compensation to the traveller, it's likely that no loss has been incurred," Mr Fuller said.
"We recommend that policy holders contact their insurer to see if they are covered before they incur any expenses that they hope to claim."




The usual stuff about reading the PDS. I know its mostly academic now in the case of the industrial action that resulted in Qantas grounding itself on the 29th Oct as most people were compensated by QF itself and are therefore ineligble to succesfully claim against their travel insurer.

I would love to see the insurance companies definition of "protracted and forseeable" industrial action given that the minister for transport had about 3 hours warning and the staff and passengers had no warning at all.

I think its also interesting that policies issued before Oct 13 are subject to this ruling. I would assume that a passenger trying to insure before October 13th would be succeesful in a claim as it was "unforeseen and unexpected" but a passenger trying to insure on the 30th Nov would not succeed in making a claim as it was "forseen and expected". I would bet that the insurance company would be happy to accept payment for travel insurance though.

As I understand it - if an event makes it "news" then whats to stop insurance companies issuing a ruling that the event is "forseeable"? Also raises an interesting question of at what point is an event "forseen" or not? I am guessing that the reality is that thanks to the terms and conditions of insurance policies that the insurer can retrospectively rule pretty much anything and its legally airtight? Would make for an interesting laywers picnic if someone cared to take the time and effort involved.

And as quick question to MEL_traveler - are the insurance companies taking the line that the grounding was a result of "union strikes" or a more general term of "industrial action" - in this case - the company or is it the safety concerns?