TRAVEL INSURANCE - HAD A CRAZY THOUGHT !

[Jangerie]

SCTI refunded my premium and waved the cancellation fee. Regardless, what use is paying extra for cancellation for any reason if there are reasons to not cover you, it's a bit like the fire insurance that did not cover melting during the last bush fire season. It will be good to know who were the best performers when this crisis is over. So keep adding to this forum with your +ives and -ives. For my part SCTI gets 2 stars on a 5 star scale for refunding the premium. 

[jland]

On the 6th February we purchased a yearly policy with Allclear travel insurance at a cost of $3681.90. We have always been grateful to Allclear for providing us with insurance when no other company will even consider my husband. They are an offshoot of insure and go. I emailed them asking for an extension of time, say six months, as we cannot travel. The reply I got was no refunds. As that was not what I asked for I wondered if they had even bothered to read the email or just came out with a standard reply. The email also stated if I was not happy with the reply to write, not email, their complains department which I have done. Awaiting a reply, if they won’t play ball with me I will try the insurance ombudsman.  As loyal customers we expected better. 

[rickays]

1 hour ago, jland said:

On the 6th February we purchased a yearly policy with Allclear travel insurance at a cost of $3681.90. We have always been grateful to Allclear for providing us with insurance when no other company will even consider my husband. They are an offshoot of insure and go. I emailed them asking for an extension of time, say six months, as we cannot travel. The reply I got was no refunds. As that was not what I asked for I wondered if they had even bothered to read the email or just came out with a standard reply. The email also stated if I was not happy with the reply to write, not email, their complains department which I have done. Awaiting a reply, if they won’t play ball with me I will try the insurance ombudsman.  As loyal customers we expected better. 

Try a chargeback on your credit card (if thats the way you paid) for the months left outstanding on your yearly policy.

[possum52]

2 hours ago, jland said:

On the 6th February we purchased a yearly policy with Allclear travel insurance at a cost of $3681.90. We have always been grateful to Allclear for providing us with insurance when no other company will even consider my husband. They are an offshoot of insure and go. I emailed them asking for an extension of time, say six months, as we cannot travel. The reply I got was no refunds. As that was not what I asked for I wondered if they had even bothered to read the email or just came out with a standard reply. The email also stated if I was not happy with the reply to write, not email, their complains department which I have done. Awaiting a reply, if they won’t play ball with me I will try the insurance ombudsman.  As loyal customers we expected better. 

We have a policy taken with Insure and Go for our cancelled June cruise. I contacted them and asked for a date extension so we could perhaps use it when cruising recommences. Their reply was the same as yours. I wrote back saying we are very disappointing with their attitude as we have used them many times and always recommended them to others. Answer was if we weren’t satisfied to write to their complaints department, which I will do. 
 

Leigh

[jland]

Leigh, I included my emails to them in with the letter. I thought it strange we could not email the complaints department. I will let you know if or when I get a reply.

Thanks for the suggestion Rickays but we do not want to upset Allclear if we can help it, there is no other travel insurance who will cover us.

[The_Big_M]

9 hours ago, rickays said:

Try a chargeback on your credit card (if thats the way you paid) for the months left outstanding on your yearly policy.

 

A credit card isn't a dispute management system. 

 

They comply with the ACCC in that if you don't get the goods you paid for, then you're entitled to a refund. But here where the product has been delivered but there is a disagreement between customer and seller is not something they will get involved with.

[rickays]

9 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

A credit card isn't a dispute management system. 

 

They comply with the ACCC in that if you don't get the goods you paid for, then you're entitled to a refund. But here where the product has been delivered but there is a disagreement between customer and seller is not something they will get involved with.

The service hasnt been delivered if a person has an insurance policy for a year and after 5 months gets told by the insurance company that they will no longer cover you if you make a new holiday bookings because covid19 is now a known event, then they refuse to give refund for the portion of policy they now cancelled.  Just look on product review and see how many people are not getting the service they paid for.

[The_Big_M]

52 minutes ago, rickays said:

The service hasnt been delivered if a person has an insurance policy for a year and after 5 months gets told by the insurance company that they will no longer cover you if you make a new holiday bookings because covid19 is now a known event, then they refuse to give refund for the portion of policy they now cancelled.  Just look on product review and see how many people are not getting the service they paid for.

 

That was in the existing details of the policy purchased though, as an exclusion. So the same product is being provided. The fact an exclusion is met is not a change in the product purchased.

[rickays]

9 minutes ago, The_Big_M said:

 

That was in the existing details of the policy purchased though, as an exclusion. So the same product is being provided. The fact an exclusion is met is not a change in the product purchased.

No the original policy covered pandemic, all existing holiday bookings covered for pandemic BUT future holiday booking within the original policy dates now not covered.  They changed the terms effectively making 7 months of the policy unusable and refuse to refund or credit.

Edited April 28, 2020 by rickays

[The_Big_M]

13 hours ago, rickays said:

No the original policy covered pandemic, all existing holiday bookings covered for pandemic BUT future holiday booking within the original policy dates now not covered.  They changed the terms effectively making 7 months of the policy unusable and refuse to refund or credit.

 

Which is part of the terms. Once an issue is known it is not covered for future bookings. That isn't a justification for a refund as it is standard - otherwise people would just make bookings after that point and the insurer would be on the hook even though the booker knew that it was not a reasonable thing to be covered.

[rickays]

10 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

Which is part of the terms. Once an issue is known it is not covered for future bookings. That isn't a justification for a refund as it is standard - otherwise people would just make bookings after that point and the insurer would be on the hook even though the booker knew that it was not a reasonable thing to be covered.

 

No - the terms are 1 Year, Multi Trip that COVERS pandemic, it is in the pds.  You do things your way if you want I'm just letting people know there is an option if they want to use it.  If the credit card company doesn't think its a valid dispute they will not do the chargeback.

[The_Big_M]

1 hour ago, rickays said:

 

No - the terms are 1 Year, Multi Trip that COVERS pandemic, it is in the pds.  You do things your way if you want I'm just letting people know there is an option if they want to use it.  If the credit card company doesn't think its a valid dispute they will not do the chargeback.

 

Yes, and you said they changed the terms so that was no longer included, which is in line with their terms.

 

I'm letting people know that credit card chargeback is not automatic because you disagree with the change or something is no longer suitable, but only covered if the merchant doesn't deliver what was agreed, which doesn't sound like the case here.