New rules for wheelchair users

[TigerB]

2 hours ago, S1971 said:

 

Agreed.

 

Doesn't answer the reasoning behind P&O and Cunards decision to only allow scooters and chairs fewer cabins than before.

 

Unless of course!!

 

Less assistance = less crew = more profit.

 

 

See post #237, in which I mention the amount of cabins now available to guests that may require 2:1 assistance and an evacuation chair.  If all are occupied by guests who require such assistance, the ship needs to provide more trained staff and evacuation chairs. So, if the change in policy is as a means to reduce the burden, aren't they shooting themselves in the foot?

[TigerB]

3 hours ago, Tommart said:

Sadly, having read through all these posts, it looks very much as if P&O have reached the conclusion that guests with disabilities are less profitable than those without - particularly if it 'spoils' the environment for the 'yoof' market they're now clearly aiming at.  They'll have made very sure that they comply with the Equality Act, I'm sure, but it's still worth bearing in mind:

 

https://www.abta.com/tips-and-advice/accessible-travel/cruise-and-ferry-passenger-rights

 

Only P&O will know the actual economics, but I'm guessing that the changes in the perception of cruising over recent years, and the greater affordability, make the new target market much more profitable than the old one - particularly the disabled section of the old market. Young people are probably also going to spend more onboard, where the real profits lie.

 

In terms of pure profit, a young fit person is likely to spend more and cost less than an older person on a mobility scooter. I suspect it really is that simple - though P&O are bound to deny it.

 

 

 

If what you write is true then Carnival are overlooking the spending power of the purple pound, probably at their peril.

[S1971]

14 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

It was but White Star was the forerunner of Cunard.

 

Ship fires are far more common than you think, look up Star Princess and Achile Lauro that's just two straight off the top of my head. 

 

But were these ships actually owned by Cunard as you appear to have implied earlier about their safety record?

[Golfwidow100]

30 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

In other news, I received a letter from Aviva today as they are gradually taking over the Nationwide Flex Plus cover from UK Insurance Ltd. It was concerning upgrades including pre-existing medical conditions. I found the wording on this (including test results) to be very interesting. You have to report diagnosed medical conditions. The word ‘diagnosed’ is used consistently. With regards to medical treatment or tests, yet again it refers to diagnosed conditions. Now, in my case, I am having a precautionary test due to my age and family history. I have not been diagnosed with anything, unless the letter (when it eventually arrives) says that I have. Under the section detailing what you must declare about diagnosed conditions it states (and I quote) “If an insured person has any medical conditions that don’t meet the above criteria you don’t need to tell us about them, and they are covered without the need for a pre-existing conditions upgrade”.
 

Whilst it would be foolish not to declare a diagnosed condition, as for the assertion that by not doing so your whole policy becomes invalid, that is also dispelled by the letter. It specifically goes on to say that if you don’t declare a diagnosed pre-existing medical condition then you will not be covered for claims resulting from that specific condition. 
 

I only mention this because I know from personal experience when I booked our 65 night cruise last year, this forum is sometimes subject to some scare mongering and alarmism, which is all made with good intent, but different insurance companies have different terms and conditions (and different reputations). All the things that people scared me to death about last year were all easily overcome and at perfectly reasonable cost (not the thousands that some had predicted). Hope that helps. 

Hi Selbourne, this is interesting. I had to call my insurer yesterday regarding some health related issues that I have had tests for recently. 2 out of 3 issues are clear but I am awaiting a diagnosis for the 3rd. I will be travelling overseas in the next couple of weeks (on land, not a cruise) so wanted to declare all of my tests/results etc and assumed if I was taken ill abroad, anything remotely related to the undiagnosed condition, wouldn't be covered or worst case scenario, the policy would be cancelled. I was pleasantly surprised to hear that as it's undiagnosed, my cover is unchanged. The only thing I need to obtain is a 'Fit to Travel' letter from my GP but it doesn't need to arrive before my travel apparently which is good as on the practice website, it can take up to 18 working days! I can breathe a sigh of relief now as if my cover had changed, I wouldn't have travelled as the condition can affect major organs and as such I would consider it foolish to take the risk. I wish you the best of luck and hope you get everything sorted. 

[TigerB]

3 hours ago, Megabear2 said:

They're certainly filling up the suites as people are moving across there if they can afford it! The release next month or shortly after will be interesting.

 

MB, you have well and truly hit the nail on the head there!

We had breakfast in Epicurean (Arvia) this morning, not as suite guests I may add.  You can easily tell the suite guests, as they almost always have the window tables and are well known to the waiting staff. One wheelchair user clearly had complex needs, so I would wager that guest and their partner would occupy the only accessible suite on this ship.  There were three other guests that had powered mobility devices. I wonder how many of those were previously booked in what are now considered unsuitable cabins and had a phone call from P&O in last couple of weeks to be given the option of, 'your cruise is being cancelled because we have no fully accessible cabins free' or 'we do have a non-accessible suite available, in which you can use your mobility device'.  An easy money earner for P&O!

[S1971]

21 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

Not as easy as it sounds. These storage rooms would require to be fire resisting compartments with all the usual active and passive fire safety measures in place equating to cost and loss of saleable space.

You would also need to have several of  them spaced out on each passenger deck level.

 

So do the cabins they are now allocating have all these additional fire resistant measures in place? 

 

I'm almost certain they haven't put any additional fire measures in place in those cabins, in addition all cabins should be compartmentalised and fire resistant at the time of construction to what I suspect a minimum of about 30 minutes.

 

 

[AchileLauro]

37 minutes ago, S1971 said:

 

But were these ships actually owned by Cunard as you appear to have implied earlier about their safety record?

No I didn't imply those ships belonged to Cunard, I mentioned them as examples of ship fires.

What I did mention about a past example of poor ship safety with Cunard was the notorious trans Atlantic cruise  when QE2 was detained by the U.S. coastguard.

[AchileLauro]

29 minutes ago, S1971 said:

 

So do the cabins they are now allocating have all these additional fire resistant measures in place? 

 

I'm almost certain they haven't put any additional fire measures in place in those cabins, in addition all cabins should be compartmentalised and fire resistant at the time of construction to what I suspect a minimum of about 30 minutes.

 

 

The question was posed about storage areas not about storing scooters etc. in cabins which are adequately fire protected.

Edited Tuesday at 04:15 PM by AchileLauro

[Megabear2]

1 hour ago, Selbourne said:

I thought that you might find the following update useful. I checked with my GP that they hadn’t received my test results (they haven’t) and they recommended contacting the PALS team (Patient Advice and Liason) at the hospital. This service seems to be designed to head off complaints before they are made (important for them in these CQC days). I left a voicemail yesterday afternoon and a very helpful chap called me back at lunchtime today. He had already looked up when my appointment was (I had deleted it from my diary) and he noted all of my concerns about the anxiety of waiting for results (having been told that I would have received them by now) plus the potential issue that this might cause with insurance. The system they use is that they follow up with the relevant department and a senior member of staff from that department has to call me within 5 days. Thankfully this will still be well before my insurance renewal date. 
 

In other news, I received a letter from Aviva today as they are gradually taking over the Nationwide Flex Plus cover from UK Insurance Ltd. It was concerning upgrades including pre-existing medical conditions. I found the wording on this (including test results) to be very interesting. You have to report diagnosed medical conditions. The word ‘diagnosed’ is used consistently. With regards to medical treatment or tests, yet again it refers to diagnosed conditions. Now, in my case, I am having a precautionary test due to my age and family history. I have not been diagnosed with anything, unless the letter (when it eventually arrives) says that I have. Under the section detailing what you must declare about diagnosed conditions it states (and I quote) “If an insured person has any medical conditions that don’t meet the above criteria you don’t need to tell us about them, and they are covered without the need for a pre-existing conditions upgrade”.
 

Whilst it would be foolish not to declare a diagnosed condition, as for the assertion that by not doing so your whole policy becomes invalid, that is also dispelled by the letter. It specifically goes on to say that if you don’t declare a diagnosed pre-existing medical condition then you will not be covered for claims resulting from that specific condition. 
 

I only mention this because I know from personal experience when I booked our 65 night cruise last year, this forum is sometimes subject to some scare mongering and alarmism, which is all made with good intent, but different insurance companies have different terms and conditions (and different reputations). All the things that people scared me to death about last year were all easily overcome and at perfectly reasonable cost (not the thousands that some had predicted). Hope that helps. 

 

Whilst very good news that you appear to be covered unless diagnosed it is still very much a fact that other major insurers have far more stringent rules so extreme care must be taken to ensure exactly what your personal insurance covers.  Your case is not a normal scenario for most people being tested - I too undergo three yearly tests voluntarily to check my cancer status and I declare them to insurers despite my cancer diagnosis being 29 years ago and these tests are purely preventative.  Some insurers (the Post Office for instance) insist on full disclosure rather than a tick box of more than 20 years ago and this is because of these blood tests and mammograms being on my records.

 

It's really very difficult, no rule covering every company.

 

From a current Staysure policy for instance:

 

"Unless specifically agreed by us and it is shown on your Validation Certificate this policy will not provide cover if any insured person: •  has any undiagnosed symptoms. •  is awaiting any test, test results or investigations. •  has received a terminal prognosis. •  is awaiting surgery, a procedure or is waiting to be discharged from post-operative checks. •  is currently on or awaiting dialysis, chemotherapy or radiotherapy." 

 

And

 

"Changes to your health

Tell us about changes to your health by logging in to your MyStaysure account at www.staysure.co.uk or by contacting our Staysure Customer Services Team. You must tell us If any of the following happen after you purchase your policy, or before booking any new trips or before starting a trip:

• you are diagnosed with a new medical condition. • you experience new or recurring symptoms or have an undiagnosed condition. • your doctor, or consultant adds to or changes your prescribed medication. • you receive inpatient medical treatment. • you are now awaiting a diagnosis, investigation, test results or medical treatment. A member of the team will ask you specific questions about your medical condition(s). This may result in an additional premium to allow cover to continue, or we may add additional Terms and Conditions to your policy or exclude cover for the newly diagnosed condition or for the condition that has undergone significant change. We may require you to obtain a Medical Report from your doctor, or consultant to allow us to assess whether cover can continue."

 

Staysure may indeed cover people depending on what the awaited test results relate to but the individual will need to notify them of the tests or quite simply there is no cover.  That is pretty standard and certainly not alarmist.

 

The policy from Nationwide underwritten by Aviva will have different terms from other policies under the Aviva name as well.  This from the travel policy Aviva sell under their own name:

 

"What is not covered

1. Anything mentioned in the General Exclusions section.

2. Any claim for a medical condition if any of the following applied when you took out or renewed your policy or when you booked your trip (whichever is later). You:

a. had received advice, medication or treatment for any serious, chronic or recurring illness, injury or disease in the last 12 months unless the condition was disclosed to and accepted by us;

b. were under investigation or awaiting results for any diagnosed or undiagnosed condition unless disclosed to and accepted by us;

c. were on a waiting list for in-patient treatment or were aware of the need for in-patient treatment for any diagnosed or undiagnosed condition unless disclosed to and accepted by us;

d. had been told you have a terminal illness.

 

Again you need to notify of the tests and get the company to put it on record.

 

I have download copies of over 20 policies on sale in the UK from my research on the insurance issue with covid and the notification of tests is very rarely not required.

 

[S1971]

12 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

No I didn't imply those ships belonged to Cunard, I mentioned them as examples of ship fires.

What I did mention about a past example of poor ship safety with Cunard was the notorious trans Atlantic cruise  when QE2 was detained by the U.S. coastguard.

 

"After all if you look at the historic safety record of Cunard (and I'm not talking about the Titanic) their record is hardly stellar"

 

As quoted above, that definitely implies you were talking about Cunard.

 

You then mention 3 other ships none of which were owned by Cunard, so are irrelevant.

 

 

[Selbourne]

2 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

 

Whilst very good news that you appear to be covered unless diagnosed it is still very much a fact that other major insurers have far more stringent rules so extreme care must be taken to ensure exactly what your personal insurance covers.  Your case is not a normal scenario for most people being tested - I too undergo three yearly tests voluntarily to check my cancer status and I declare them to insurers despite my cancer diagnosis being 29 years ago and these tests are purely preventative.  Some insurers (the Post Office for instance) insist on full disclosure rather than a tick box of more than 20 years ago and this is because of these blood tests and mammograms being on my records.

 

It's really very difficult, no rule covering every company.

 

From a current Staysure policy for instance:

 

"Unless specifically agreed by us and it is shown on your Validation Certificate this policy will not provide cover if any insured person: •  has any undiagnosed symptoms. •  is awaiting any test, test results or investigations. •  has received a terminal prognosis. •  is awaiting surgery, a procedure or is waiting to be discharged from post-operative checks. •  is currently on or awaiting dialysis, chemotherapy or radiotherapy." 

 

And

 

"Changes to your health

Tell us about changes to your health by logging in to your MyStaysure account at www.staysure.co.uk or by contacting our Staysure Customer Services Team. You must tell us If any of the following happen after you purchase your policy, or before booking any new trips or before starting a trip:

• you are diagnosed with a new medical condition. • you experience new or recurring symptoms or have an undiagnosed condition. • your doctor, or consultant adds to or changes your prescribed medication. • you receive inpatient medical treatment. • you are now awaiting a diagnosis, investigation, test results or medical treatment. A member of the team will ask you specific questions about your medical condition(s). This may result in an additional premium to allow cover to continue, or we may add additional Terms and Conditions to your policy or exclude cover for the newly diagnosed condition or for the condition that has undergone significant change. We may require you to obtain a Medical Report from your doctor, or consultant to allow us to assess whether cover can continue."

 

Staysure may indeed cover people depending on what the awaited test results relate to but the individual will need to notify them of the tests or quite simply there is no cover.  That is pretty standard and certainly not alarmist.

 

The policy from Nationwide underwritten by Aviva will have different terms from other policies under the Aviva name as well.  This from the travel policy Aviva sell under their own name:

 

"What is not covered

1. Anything mentioned in the General Exclusions section.

2. Any claim for a medical condition if any of the following applied when you took out or renewed your policy or when you booked your trip (whichever is later). You:

a. had received advice, medication or treatment for any serious, chronic or recurring illness, injury or disease in the last 12 months unless the condition was disclosed to and accepted by us;

b. were under investigation or awaiting results for any diagnosed or undiagnosed condition unless disclosed to and accepted by us;

c. were on a waiting list for in-patient treatment or were aware of the need for in-patient treatment for any diagnosed or undiagnosed condition unless disclosed to and accepted by us;

d. had been told you have a terminal illness.

 

Again you need to notify of the tests and get the company to put it on record.

 

I have download copies of over 20 policies on sale in the UK from my research on the insurance issue with covid and the notification of tests is very rarely not required.

 

I certainly wasn’t implying that every policy is the same. In fact I stated that they weren’t. My point was really that it’s worth checking as all policies are different. Sometimes the worst case scenario of an insurer that has extremely strict rules (that some may call ‘get out clauses’) can be implied on here as applying to all insurers when that clearly is not the case.
 

I’m probably fortunate (or have chosen good insurers) but on the few occasions that I’ve had to make claims I’ve experienced none of the horror stories that we all read about. Like you, I read everything carefully and if I’m unsure I ask the insurer directly. 

[S1971]

23 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

The question was posed about storage areas not about storing scooters etc. in cabins which are adequately fire protected.

 

"they could maybe provide parking locations where scooters could be safely stored overnight"

 

I beg to differ, all enclosed areas are fire protected.

 

Anyway let's move on.

[Victoria2]

The fact the imposition of the revised 'health' [I use the term advisedly as so many unknown issues are involved] is a fact and

we don't know why

and

all thoughts on the subject are speculative until we are otherwise informed.

[Megabear2]

11 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

I certainly wasn’t implying that every policy is the same. In fact I stated that they weren’t. My point was really that it’s worth checking as all policies are different. Sometimes the worst case scenario of an insurer that has extremely strict rules (that some may call ‘get out clauses’) can be implied on here as applying to all insurers when that clearly is not the case.
 

I’m probably fortunate (or have chosen good insurers) but on the few occasions that I’ve had to make claims I’ve experienced none of the horror stories that we all read about. Like you, I read everything carefully and if I’m unsure I ask the insurer directly. 

As you know I have been very much involved with a horror story following my elderly aunt naively dealing with her own insurance and not understanding the complexities.  She also had health conditions which precluded her from many mainstream insurers and with the aid of a misguided neighbour bought her policy from a supposedly top rated insurer for the over 80's and with health conditions.  There are very many alarm bells and warnings I make no apologies for sounding as a result of that horrendous experience, never would I wish our nightmare on any other individual even my worst enemy.  

 

There are so many traps for people to plummet into I'd much rather dot every I and cross every t to get the message out and I make absolutely no apologies for doing so.

 

I assume when you do renew you will speak to Nationwide Aviva and if necessary tell them of your test no matter the result.  It would be interesting to hear  if they do want to know.

[Dermotsgirl]

1 hour ago, Golfwidow100 said:

Hi Selbourne, this is interesting. I had to call my insurer yesterday regarding some health related issues that I have had tests for recently. 2 out of 3 issues are clear but I am awaiting a diagnosis for the 3rd. I will be travelling overseas in the next couple of weeks (on land, not a cruise) so wanted to declare all of my tests/results etc and assumed if I was taken ill abroad, anything remotely related to the undiagnosed condition, wouldn't be covered or worst case scenario, the policy would be cancelled. I was pleasantly surprised to hear that as it's undiagnosed, my cover is unchanged. The only thing I need to obtain is a 'Fit to Travel' letter from my GP but it doesn't need to arrive before my travel apparently which is good as on the practice website, it can take up to 18 working days! I can breathe a sigh of relief now as if my cover had changed, I wouldn't have travelled as the condition can affect major organs and as such I would consider it foolish to take the risk. I wish you the best of luck and hope you get everything sorted. 

Can I ask what insurance company you are with? 
 

I’m with Staysure - back in January my optician referred me as a glaucoma suspect. I did what I thought was the right thing, and advised Staysure. They won’t cover me for anything glaucoma related until I get a diagnosis. Also they won’t cover me for any of my pre-existing conditions until I get the glaucoma diagnosis! Fortunately, the pre-existing conditions that I declared are very unlikely to cause any issues and I’m currently only travelling in the U.K. 

 

However, if I had cover for a pre existing serious illness, this could be taken away if I declared a referral for something completely unrelated, which is not ideal.

 

Like Selbourne, my husband is awaiting the outcome of tests, he’s been waiting for two months now. I haven’t even bothered to contact Staysure yet until I’ve got more information - fortunately the renewal date isn’t until April.

 

As a result of this I’ll be looking for a new insurer in April

 

 

[Golfwidow100]

1 minute ago, Dermotsgirl said:

Can I ask what insurance company you are with? 
 

I’m with Staysure - back in January my optician referred me as a glaucoma suspect. I did what I thought was the right thing, and advised Staysure. They won’t cover me for anything glaucoma related until I get a diagnosis. Also they won’t cover me for any of my pre-existing conditions until I get the glaucoma diagnosis! Fortunately, the pre-existing conditions that I declared are very unlikely to cause any issues and I’m currently only travelling in the U.K. 

 

However, if I had cover for a pre existing serious illness, this could be taken away if I declared a referral for something completely unrelated, which is not ideal.

 

Like Selbourne, my husband is awaiting the outcome of tests, he’s been waiting for two months now. I haven’t even bothered to contact Staysure yet until I’ve got more information - fortunately the renewal date isn’t until April.

 

As a result of this I’ll be looking for a new insurer in April

 

 

I'm also with Staysure and I was really surprised at the outcome. I'm sorry to hear that you are in a catch 22 situation and don't blame you for looking for a new provider. I hope you and your husband don't have to wait too much longer for your results. 

 

I was quite expecting cover to be severely restricted and therefore making it too risky to travel. At the end of the call, I asked the advisor to clarify once again and she reiterated there is no change to my existing cover but I would need a 'fit to travel' letter from my GP. As my GP is aware that I will be travelling overseas, I am keeping my fingers crossed there's no issue in obtaining one. 

 

11 years ago, I had extensive surgery to my foot and ankle and was on crutches for around 4 months. I had a cruise booked for 7 months after the planned date but as the surgery was cancelled twice, it finally went ahead with only a couple of months to go. I was back to work, albeit on crutches, and was going from Southampton to Southampton on a 7 night cruise.

My insurer at the time, cancelled my policy but luckily I did manage to find another provider Travel insurance is one of the few things in life that I find very stressful!

 

 

 

 

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, AchileLauro said:

The question was posed about storage areas not about storing scooters etc. in cabins which are adequately fire protected.

Since fires are the worst thing that can happen at sea, then I would have expected that all areas of a cruise ship would be adequately fire protected.

[Selbourne]

54 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

I assume when you do renew you will speak to Nationwide Aviva and if necessary tell them of your test no matter the result.  It would be interesting to hear  if they do want to know.

If I am diagnosed with anything then yes, of course, I will declare it. If the tests are all clear then there is absolutely no requirement to disclose it as I have not been diagnosed with anything and the insurance terms and conditions don’t require me to do so. We must all do what we are comfortable with and what our individual insurance policies require. It is of no concern to me what other insurers may or may not require. 

[Megabear2]

2 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

If I am diagnosed with anything then yes, of course, I will declare it. If the tests are all clear then there is absolutely no requirement to disclose it as I have not been diagnosed with anything and the insurance terms and conditions don’t require me to do so. We must all do what we are comfortable with and what our individual insurance policies require. It is of no concern to me what other insurers may or may not require. 

Fair enough.  I also have the Nationwide policy renewing with Aviva in a couple of months so I'll find out myself as I have one of my tests due in October.  I wasn't suggesting you would need to declare your own test merely asking as you are one of the first to renew under the new insurer if you may be able to clarify the situation in general if you were speaking with them.

 

No offence was intended and I'm sorry you felt the need to be so prickly in your reply as I was simply asking for some personal help.

[terrierjohn]

2 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

If I am diagnosed with anything then yes, of course, I will declare it. If the tests are all clear then there is absolutely no requirement to disclose it as I have not been diagnosed with anything and the insurance terms and conditions don’t require me to do so. We must all do what we are comfortable with and what our individual insurance policies require. It is of no concern to me what other insurers may or may not require. 

I have found that GPs always want to prescribe some medication following any tests, even if the test results are negative, so you end up having to disclose the non existent illness to the insurance company.

[Selbourne]

3 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Fair enough.  I also have the Nationwide policy renewing with Aviva in a couple of months so I'll find out myself as I have one of my tests due in October.  I wasn't suggesting you would need to declare your own test merely asking as you are one of the first to renew under the new insurer if you may be able to clarify the situation in general if you were speaking with them.

 

No offence was intended and I'm sorry you felt the need to be so prickly in your reply as I was simply asking for some personal help.

Apologies if it came across as prickly. I’m due to renew mid October, so still have some time before I need to phone them, by which time I will (all being well) not have anything outstanding. I will need to declare one or two things that I didn’t need to last time. They shouldn’t make any difference but you never know. I’m quite happy to move insurers if they start to be silly, especially as the monthly account fee is going up from £13 to £18 before any upgrades. UK Insurance were brilliant. I’ve had policies with Aviva for many years and have always found them to be very good, but they wouldn’t cover our 65 night cruise last time, hence switching to Nationwide. As you’ve highlighted, their T’s and C’s differ between their stand alone policies and the Nationwide setup, so anything is possible.  I’ll be sure to report back on how it goes. 

[Selbourne]

3 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I have found that GPs always want to prescribe some medication following any tests, even if the test results are negative, so you end up having to disclose the non existent illness to the insurance company.

Funnily enough I’ve been put on statins as a precaution, and I will certainly be declaring that. I’m quite pleased about that though. I was chatting to a consultant anaesthetist (socially) the other day and he said that it is advisable for everyone of around 60 and over to be on them. As well as reducing the risk of heart attacks and strokes, there is apparently growing evidence that it can also lessen your chances of getting vascular dementia. With all of that taken into consideration, being on statins should therefore reduce your risk (and premium) but, as we all know, the world of insurance works in the completely opposite direction 😂 

[Tommart]

20 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

If I am diagnosed with anything then yes, of course, I will declare it. If the tests are all clear then there is absolutely no requirement to disclose it as I have not been diagnosed with anything and the insurance terms and conditions don’t require me to do so. We must all do what we are comfortable with and what our individual insurance policies require. It is of no concern to me what other insurers may or may not require. 

It may not be quite as straightforward as you think with tests and undiagnosed conditions, and @Megabear2 is entirely right to issue a warning note to others in the same position - particularly in view of her extensive practical experience in that area.

In all situations like this it's necessary to bear in mind that legally insurance is a contract of 'utmost good faith' - the principle of uberrima fides going back over countless years of common law and placing a duty of utmost good faith on both parties to  disclose all material facts. The onus of the obligations rests largely with the party being insured, who must disclose all material facts known when applying for insurance.

 

This is interesting background from the FOS:

 

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/complaints-can-help/insurance/travel-insurance/change-in-health

 

"Undiagnosed conditions

 

Even if the condition hasn’t actually been diagnosed, we might still think there was a significant change in your health.

 

If you were referred urgently to a consultant because of symptoms you were having, then we might think this is a significant change in health which you should tell your insurer about. We may not expect you to wait for a formal diagnosis before recognising that you’re experiencing a significant change in health.

 

If your doctor referred you for routine or minor tests, that doesn’t automatically mean you have a significant change in health that you should report to the insurer."

 

Obviously, whether or not to disclose is a matter entirely for you to decide, but this area is an absolute minefield for refused insurance claims, and the Financial Ombudsman Service's comments are highly relevant.

[terrierjohn]

4 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Funnily enough I’ve been put on statins as a precaution, and I will certainly be declaring that. I’m quite pleased about that though. I was chatting to a consultant anaesthetist (socially) the other day and he said that it is advisable for everyone of around 60 and over to be on them. As well as reducing the risk of heart attacks and strokes, there is apparently growing evidence that it can also lessen your chances of getting vascular dementia. With all of that taken into consideration, being on statins should therefore reduce your risk (and premium) but, as we all know, the world of insurance works in the completely opposite direction 😂 

My flex plus insurance is also due for renewal in October and I am also waiting for official confirmation of some test results.  I rang the Aviva line yesterday and even though my data has not yet been passed over to them( it goes 30 days before renewal date) they did provide me with a provisional quote which was only slightly higher than last year. However the 5 day extension to cover the 35 nighter in January was £175, which seemed a bit steep, but overall it's a still lot better than anything else  and there is no extra now for the age extension.

[Selbourne]

2 minutes ago, Tommart said:

It may not be quite as straightforward as you think with tests and undiagnosed conditions, and @Megabear2 is entirely right to issue a warning note to others in the same position - particularly in view of her extensive practical experience in that area.

In all situations like this it's necessary to bear in mind that legally insurance is a contract of 'utmost good faith' - the principle of uberrima fides going back over countless years of common law and placing a duty of utmost good faith on both parties to  disclose all material facts. The onus of the obligations rests largely with the party being insured, who must disclose all material facts known when applying for insurance.

 

This is interesting background from the FOS:

 

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/complaints-can-help/insurance/travel-insurance/change-in-health

 

"Undiagnosed conditions

 

Even if the condition hasn’t actually been diagnosed, we might still think there was a significant change in your health.

 

If you were referred urgently to a consultant because of symptoms you were having, then we might think this is a significant change in health which you should tell your insurer about. We may not expect you to wait for a formal diagnosis before recognising that you’re experiencing a significant change in health.

 

If your doctor referred you for routine or minor tests, that doesn’t automatically mean you have a significant change in health that you should report to the insurer."

 

Obviously, whether or not to disclose is a matter entirely for you to decide, but this area is an absolute minefield for refused insurance claims, and the Financial Ombudsman Service's comments are highly relevant.

I agree it’s a minefield and as I have said several times we must all make our own decisions as to which insurer we use and all insurers seem to interpret things differently which doesn’t help. However, I am content with what my (current) insurer requires and doesn’t require, so whilst I’m naturally sorry to near about others experiences, I don’t intend to be alarmed by them. Hopefully I won’t have any issues, but if I do I will shop around. Thankfully we have a clear month between our policy renewal and our next cruise, so there’s no panic. Cruises are the only overseas holidays we go on and with the recent change in policy discussed in this thread we may be coming to the end of our cruising days. We have a 2 week cruise in November and beyond that it may be U.K. holidays only, so the problem goes away 😂