Update on P&O Insurance Issues

[howmuch!]

Unfortunately, the negative passenger staying with their positive partner in the same room, could lead to a longer stay, if the negative person becomes infected after a few days.

[Megabear2]

2 hours ago, JOHNLS said:

Hello Megabear

 

Firstly, let me say how much I appreciate what you have been doing, and the amount of work you have undertaken, regarding these insurance matters.

 

Secondly, as a retired employee of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), I wouldn't want you to get your hopes up too much of anything positive resulting from your email to them.

 

After receiving a formal acknowledgment in due course, your email will be read and considered with a fuller response at some future date; I'm not too sure how long the delays are at present.

 

Unless things have changed drastically, you will be advised that your issues cannot be considered by the FOS as they are only able to consider complaints brought to them by policyholders about the policy they hold with the company they are insured with.

 

You will most likely be referred to the Financial Conduct Authority who have the power to consider the issues you have raised.

 

Regards, and keep up the good work!

 

John

Thank you. I have the standard email reply but telephoned to enquire of the position and have a name of someone calling me back in 48 hours.

 

I do have a policy of my own and also one my husband is affected by.  The question has been ongoing with his insurer since July and he had received the if your unhappy leaflet after Christmas, while we were on a cruise in fact.

 

My husband owns a compliance company so advised as travel insurance is not regulated FCA was not an option.

[Dermotsgirl]

2 hours ago, howmuch! said:

Unfortunately, the negative passenger staying with their positive partner in the same room, could lead to a longer stay, if the negative person becomes infected after a few days.

But you'd hope they'd be accommodated in the same hotel - the case that I mentioned was where the husband and wife had to go into different hotels! 

[Harry Peterson]

2 hours ago, howmuch! said:

Unfortunately, the negative passenger staying with their positive partner in the same room, could lead to a longer stay, if the negative person becomes infected after a few days.

I could imagine circumstances in which a positive test might be financially very advantageous.  I wonder if people might be tempted to ‘create’ a positive result?  😇

[Cruisemeister2002]

In view of these matters affecting cruise travel I would have thought it to be in the interests of all cruise companies to offer some reassurance to it's passengers as no doubt a percentage in the knowledge of knowing should they be quarantined ashore that they are probably not covered would be put off during this pandemic and it may be that like flu it never goes away. In which case if Countries carry on insisting that passengers be quarantined and cover of costs are dubious this would affect cruise lines for ever more.

[Megabear2]

With many thanks to JOHNLS  I've had a look into the FCA position and come across something interesting:

 

https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/travel-insurance-coronavirus

 

In light of this I'm going to give them a call this morning to discuss. Hopefully I can get a contact to follow up with that way - their website indicates a 12 week delay which is pretty useless even to those sailing in March and April!

Edited January 17, 2022 by Megabear2

[Stu UK]

This is an interesting document if still current - especially the healthcare guarantee section. 
 

https://www.mitma.gob.es/recursos_mfom/paginabasica/recursos/health_measures_for_the_restoration_of_cruise_ship_activities_in_spain_def_en_20210531.pdf

[Megabear2]

I have spoken at length with the FCA.  I full explained the scenarios at their request including reading the question asked of Holiday Extras.  There was a full grasp of the situation.  There is some good news and some vague news.

 

Dealing with my personal issue with Avanti and Halifax on behalf of my husband and I my complaint has been upheld immediately during the call and passed to the relevant department for Avanti in particular to be contacted and questioned on the omission of the situation occurring. 

 

The bad news is the insurers may just list the situation as an exclusion, however the FCA representative said that at least if this occurs we can go back to the cruise lines with documentary proof that this cover is not available in the market.

 

Further he noted that I had asked questions of a large number of other companies but he could only deal with my own personal issues.  He suggested that my family and friends who I was speaking on behalf of all contacted the FCA in the same way I had to register their problem.

 

To anyone wishing to do this I would say at 9.00am I went straight through without holding and my entire call took 15 minutes. If anyone is interested in this route the number is 0800 111 6768.

 

The second piece of advice from the FCA was to send a report form to their department dealing with Unclear Customer Contracts.  I have now completed this adjusting the text from the second Holiday Extras email to their CEO.  I have referred to all of the companies whose policies I examined and those I have emailed last week have been highlighted.

 

I think we may have exhausted this route for my role in it, but individuals may  be able to push the issue if they are prepared to invest their time in a telephone call.   I may be contacted by the Unfair Contracts team if they require further information apparently. 

 

Really on the FCA front it's now over to you I'm afraid.  If anyone does call them, please keep us posted here.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Megabear2

[clearblueseas]

Some really good interesting information coming forth. I thank all concerned. Will print out all documents to add to a increasing thick portfolio.

[Teddy123]

1 hour ago, Stu UK said:

This is an interesting document if still current - especially the healthcare guarantee section. 
 

https://www.mitma.gob.es/recursos_mfom/paginabasica/recursos/health_measures_for_the_restoration_of_cruise_ship_activities_in_spain_def_en_20210531.pdf

This seems a great find, and crucial - if still valid.  To me, it says cruise lines must have insurance to cover all the costs of people offloaded and quarantined, whether positive or negative.  A "nothing to do with us" stance from any cruise line thus seems unjustified, and the question of passengers' insurance seems irrelevant.  Cruise lines should have the insurance and should consequently meet the offloading costs.

[Slugsta]

43 minutes ago, Teddy123 said:

This seems a great find, and crucial - if still valid.  To me, it says cruise lines must have insurance to cover all the costs of people offloaded and quarantined, whether positive or negative.  A "nothing to do with us" stance from any cruise line thus seems unjustified, and the question of passengers' insurance seems irrelevant.  Cruise lines should have the insurance and should consequently meet the offloading costs.

 

Yes, that was how I read it too . . .

[Teddy123]

1 hour ago, Teddy123 said:

This seems a great find, and crucial - if still valid.  To me, it says cruise lines must have insurance to cover all the costs of people offloaded and quarantined, whether positive or negative.  A "nothing to do with us" stance from any cruise line thus seems unjustified, and the question of passengers' insurance seems irrelevant.  Cruise lines should have the insurance and should consequently meet the offloading costs.

Of course, this does only apply to Spain - but that seems to be the main area of concern currently.

[Megabear2]

For Admiral policy holders we have a reply in the "usual" terms. I have followed up with the "straightforward" answer question. 

 

Good Afternoon,

 

We can confirm that your policy has cover for specific COVID-19 related events as listed in Section 3 of the policy wording. Please refer to the policy wording for full terms and conditions to ensure the cover we offer meets your needs.

 

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT COVER FOR SPECIFIC COVID-19 RELATED EVENTS

 

Please note that by the term ‘you’ we mean you or a travel companion named on your policy.

 

All claims are subject to the policy limits and excesses, and you will be covered for your proportion of the irrecoverable costs only.

 

All claims are subject to a medically approved test showing a positive result for Covid-19 as certified by a registered Medical Practitioner and your cover being active at the time of the event.

 

Where the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) have not advised against all, or all but essential travel, we will extend the policy limits under Section 1: Emergency Medical and Repatriation cover and Section 2: Cancelling or Cutting Short Your Trip to specific Covid-19 related events as follows:

 

Before you travel:

 

• You are diagnosed with Covid-19 within the 14 days prior to your trip departure.
• The hospitalisation or death of a close relative* within the 14 days prior to your trip departure due to them contracting Covid-19

 

During your trip:

 

• You are denied boarding on your pre-booked outbound travel due to symptoms of Covid-19
• Emergency medical treatment and repatriation if you contract Covid-19 on your trip
• Associated accommodation and/or travel costs if you must self-isolate because you contract Covid-19 on your trip (up to £1000 maximum per person)
• Cutting short your trip due to your death or the death of a close relative* as a result of Covid-19
• Unused pre-booked excursion costs where you are ordered to self-isolate due to contracting Covid-19

 

There is no cover for any claims:

 

• Where you travelled against FCDO advice for ‘all’ or ‘all but essential’ travel
• Where the change in FCDO advice is directly or indirectly related to Covid-19
• Due to travel restrictions or quarantine imposed by any government or public authority, including local lockdowns and compulsory entry requirements.
• Where you had reason to believe you may have Covid-19 when you booked your trip, purchased the policy, or extended your cover or travelled, for example you knew of the need to take a test.
• For cancelling, cutting short your trip or being unable to continue with a trip or prebooked excursion because you are required to self-isolate due to the potential exposure to Covid-19 (for example being contacted by NHS track and trace) except for the reasons specified above.
• Where your travel provider continues to operate flights against FCDO travel advice, where the advice is directly or indirectly related to Covid-19
• Where you are unable to stay in your pre-booked accommodation or vessel due to a local outbreak of Covid-19

 

*FYI - We define a Close relative as: Your partner, parent, parent-in-law, step-parent or legal guardian, child, child-in-law, step-child or foster child, sibling, sibling-in-law, half-sibling or step-sibling, grandparent or grandchild.

 

We trust that this is sufficient for your needs. However, if you have any other queries, you can view our FAQ’s page at https://www.admiral.com/coronavirus or please do not hesitate to contact us. 

 

it would seem the problem is not covered due to "Due to travel restrictions or quarantine imposed by any government or public authority, including local lockdowns and compulsory entry requirements." but I have asked for specific confirmation.

Edited January 17, 2022 by Megabear2
Missed words

[Roger88]

3 hours ago, Stu UK said:

This is an interesting document if still current - especially the healthcare guarantee section. 
 

https://www.mitma.gob.es/recursos_mfom/paginabasica/recursos/health_measures_for_the_restoration_of_cruise_ship_activities_in_spain_def_en_20210531.pdf

Well, it looks promising. I wonder how many people would read it before going on a cruise. Its got some really usefull information. I wonder if something similar to it will ever be publicaly and massively available

[Interestedcruisefan]

1 hour ago, Teddy123 said:

This seems a great find, and crucial - if still valid.  To me, it says cruise lines must have insurance to cover all the costs of people offloaded and quarantined, whether positive or negative.  A "nothing to do with us" stance from any cruise line thus seems unjustified, and the question of passengers' insurance seems irrelevant.  Cruise lines should have the insurance and should consequently meet the offloading costs.

Won't the cruise lines just say if someone is negative they aren't asking them to offload 

 

And that's purely customer choice when it happens 

 

Although we all of course realise many families would never leave others overseas on their own 

[Teddy123]

1 minute ago, Interestedcruisefan said:

Won't the cruise lines just say if someone is negative they aren't asking them to offload 

 

And that's purely customer choice when it happens 

 

Although we all of course realise many families would never leave others overseas on their own 

My understanding was that the Spanish authorities required negative contacts to be offloaded and ship captains were agreeing to this and sending negative people ashore - so no choice.

[Megabear2]

45 minutes ago, Teddy123 said:

My understanding was that the Spanish authorities required negative contacts to be offloaded and ship captains were agreeing to this and sending negative people ashore - so no choice.

That is correct.  There have been one or two incidents where families in large groups were allowed to fly home if negative.  There was an octogenarian left in I believe Tenerife because the family were large, around 10 if I recall. Because they were negative tested Marella sent them on their booked flight. This was a Marella fly cruise so assumedly the Captain/Tui were able to take that decision.  As long as they were negative they could of course meet the UK Government rules prevailing at that time so the only choice was whether to go or stay and pay your own way.  I'm guessing that's what's happening with the lady and gent at the moment.

 

There have not as far as I know, been any P&O guests in that position because the cruises do not start at a European port  although we will shortly have Azura doing so. Those who tested positive in Gibraltar were allowed to isolate onboard until Southampton, again last port before home.

 

The difference with our cases is of course illness/contact occurring mid cruise within Spanish waters.

 

MSC and NCL have had passengers offloaded in Italy/Greece under the same terms. I understand the Greek quarantine facilities are far superior to Spanish ones!

[Megabear2]

1 hour ago, Roger88 said:

Well, it looks promising. I wonder how many people would read it before going on a cruise. Its got some really usefull information. I wonder if something similar to it will ever be publicaly and massively available

One of my brother in laws works in shipping and I asked him if he knows if this is still in operation. He didn't know so suggested I should ask P&O.  I have now done so and await a reply.

 

I also in a friendly way let them know I'm in contact with Holiday Extras et al and also about the FCA comment about exclusion clauses being something in writing to show cruise lines. 

 

Let's see if there's any news on their insurers discussions with Holiday Extras as it might be useful in my conversations with them.

[terrierjohn]

3 hours ago, Teddy123 said:

Of course, this does only apply to Spain - but that seems to be the main area of concern currently.

Can the Spanish govt dictate insurance terms to companies insuring UK passengers sailing on ships based in the UK, I wonder?

[Teddy123]

4 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Can the Spanish govt dictate insurance terms to companies insuring UK passengers sailing on ships based in the UK, I wonder?

I imagine what it can do is say "you can't come into any Spanish port unless you have this insurance" - which is what the referenced document is about, I think.

[terrierjohn]

Just now, Teddy123 said:

I imagine what it can do is say "you can't come into any Spanish port unless you have this insurance" - which is what the referenced document is about, I think.

I very much doubt the practicality of that.

[Teddy123]

3 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I very much doubt the practicality of that.

You may be right that phyisically stopping a ship going into a port may be difficult, but preventing anybody leaving the ship if it can't provide the right paperwork is surely trivial - and that's the only incentive a cruise line will need.

[Megabear2]

Actually if you think about it, back in October my P&O contact told me in the event of someone's insurance not covering their quarantine the individuals' insurance companies would be contacted by P&Os to discuss who should pay.  This would indicate some form of insurance requirements on the part of P&O possibly being necessary?  Also if no one has been out of pocket from P&O/Cunard and ex gratia payments have been taking place could this be precisely because of this Spanish document as opposed to the protocols we have been assuming were what were directing Spanish actions.

 

If you recall a week or so back when the new terms and conditions arrived on the website Molecrochip indicated that was the way it had always been meant to operate, ie passengers had cover from someone regardless of who.

[howmuch!]

Its like 'pass the parcel' , but we have no idea who's controlling the music!

[bee-ess]

1 hour ago, howmuch! said:

Its like 'pass the parcel' , but we have no idea who's controlling the music!

Somebody has to be left holding the parcel and unfairly at the moment that is the passenger !

 

Surely if the insurance companies won't pay out unless testing positive then you would think for the small number of cases involved that the cruise line would pick up the bill. I would think that would give  the passengers more security  knowing that the cruise line will pay if the insurance won't and that in turn that would make more people cruise.