Are food allergies a preexisting condition?

[chloe77]

I didn't buy travel insurance at my initial payment but I can buy it within 24 hours of final payment, and I'm wondering if I need the preexisting medical coverage for food allergies? We have a family member with anaphylactic nut allergies. He hasn't seen a doctor or received treatment in the past 8 months for a reaction, but he's been under the yearly care of an allergist since he was a baby to have his epipens prescribed, etc. Are nut allergies a preexisting condition? That's the only reason (aside from a freak accident) that I could see us needing medical coverage, and I don't want to choose a policy that doesn't have a preexisting condition waiver and then have them deny a claim. But the coverage seems to be better/cheaper if I don't need the waiver. Any advice? Thank you!

[GeezerCouple]

10 minutes ago, chloe77 said:

I didn't buy travel insurance at my initial payment but I can buy it within 24 hours of final payment, and I'm wondering if I need the preexisting medical coverage for food allergies? We have a family member with anaphylactic nut allergies. He hasn't seen a doctor or received treatment in the past 8 months for a reaction, but he's been under the yearly care of an allergist since he was a baby to have his epipens prescribed, etc. Are nut allergies a preexisting condition? That's the only reason (aside from a freak accident) that I could see us needing medical coverage, and I don't want to choose a policy that doesn't have a preexisting condition waiver and then have them deny a claim. But the coverage seems to be better/cheaper if I don't need the waiver. Any advice? Thank you!

 

Welcome to CruiseCritic (or your first post, anyway)!

 

That's a very interesting question.

 

Others will chime in here, but in this situation, I would definitely want something IN WRITING that "the food allergy is not a pre-existing condition", or *preferably* get a policy that does not exclude pre-existing conditions.

 

We always get that waiver, so if there were something like this lurking that we hadn't thought about, it would still be covered.

We have a few other mild conditions, but we worry that IF something major happened, it could be linked back to some mild condition.  It's just easier not to worry about it.

And most of our claims *have* been based upon medical emergency (although the claims themselves were mostly for cancelled/interrupted trip costs).

 

As I've mentioned elsewhere, given that we do have possible pre-existing conditions, and some definite ones, we want the guaranteed coverage for the SWAN effect:  Sleep Well At Night! 😉 

 

Another likely advantage of having that waiver, although probably not worth the extra cost if this were to be the only reason (it isn't, for us) is that it may expedite some claims payments.

That is, when we've had claims that were based upon some medical situation, the insurer didn't need to comb through old medical records to see if there was indeed some pre-existing condition that might have been involved.  That could probably take considerably time in some cases.

I don't think we'd have had the claims, including large ones, paid within about 2 weeks if that had been necessary.

 

GC

[chloe77]

Thank you so much! This is helpful. I have been reading this board for years but don't post because most questions are already asked/answered. But in this case I cannot find a clear answer online and the brokers I've spoken to SAY it's covered but can't give me anything in writing. Thanks again!

[iamtrustworthy]

56 minutes ago, chloe77 said:

I didn't buy travel insurance at my initial payment but I can buy it within 24 hours of final payment, and I'm wondering if I need the preexisting medical coverage for food allergies? We have a family member with anaphylactic nut allergies. He hasn't seen a doctor or received treatment in the past 8 months for a reaction, but he's been under the yearly care of an allergist since he was a baby to have his epipens prescribed, etc. Are nut allergies a preexisting condition? That's the only reason (aside from a freak accident) that I could see us needing medical coverage, and I don't want to choose a policy that doesn't have a preexisting condition waiver and then have them deny a claim. But the coverage seems to be better/cheaper if I don't need the waiver. Any advice? Thank you!

Hi chloe77,

 

Food allergies and any other medical condition will be defined as a pre-existing medical conition if they existed as defined by the Lookback Period of the policy you buy.

 

This page explains the Pre-Existing Medical Condition Lookback Period in a Trip Cancellation plan:

https://tripinsurancestore.com/travel-insurance-pre-existing-medical-condition-lookback-period/

 

I hope this makes sense,

 

Steve Dasseos

[chloe77]

Thanks so much. He has not seen his allergist since June 2023 for a routine annual check up. No medication changes were made. He hasn't had an allergic reaction requiring medical attention since 2022. So are you saying that even though his allergy was diagnosed many years ago, since he hasn't had any of the listed issues during the lookback period, it wouldn't be considered a preexisting condition?

 

That's where I'm confused. It's preexisting, but nothing happened during the lookback period. 

 

Thanks so much.

[iamtrustworthy]

12 hours ago, chloe77 said:

Thanks so much. He has not seen his allergist since June 2023 for a routine annual check up. No medication changes were made. He hasn't had an allergic reaction requiring medical attention since 2022. So are you saying that even though his allergy was diagnosed many years ago, since he hasn't had any of the listed issues during the lookback period, it wouldn't be considered a preexisting condition?

 

That's where I'm confused. It's preexisting, but nothing happened during the lookback period. 

 

Thanks so much.

Hi chloe77,

 

> So are you saying that even though his allergy was diagnosed many years ago, since he hasn't had any of the listed issues during the lookback period, it wouldn't be considered a preexisting condition?

 

That's correct, his allergy doesn't meet the definition of pre-existing medical condition when nothing has occured as defined by the plan's lookback period.

 

> That's where I'm confused. It's preexisting, but nothing happened during the lookback period.

 

His allergy would be considered preexisting for a medical, life or disablility insurance plan, but not necessarily for a Trip Cancellation plan.

 

Steve Dasseos

[klfrodo]

I always buy my insurance with the idea that in the event of a claim, the insurance company is going to do anything and everything to not pay the claim.

My wife and I have medical conditions that have not changed in the past couple of years. Therefore, under the definitions, these should not be pre-existing conditions. 

With that being said, I always follow the requirements necessary to ensure that I buy the insurance that includes the waiver for pre-existing conditions. Gives the insurance company one less reason to deny my claim.

[CDNPolar]

19 hours ago, klfrodo said:

 

My wife and I have medical conditions that have not changed in the past couple of years. Therefore, under the definitions, these should not be pre-existing conditions. 

 

 

First, I am not questioning your medical conditions and don't know your insurance policy language, but this is my experience.

 

In the Canadian insurance policies anything that you are taking a medication for or are receiving treatment for could be considered a pre-existing condition no matter how long you have had the medical condition.

 

In most cases diabetes is not one of these unless your diabetes is not well managed.

 

For instance, if you are on a beta blocker for your heart, and you have been stable for 3 years with no issues, no medication changes, etc., then you are stable and good to go.  No worries here.

 

However if your doc changes the medication, or now is recommending a Holter Monitor even as a routine follow up test, this now changes you - in most insurance - to an unstable pre-existing condition and you must conform to the stability period of 3 months or 6 months after the test or the medication change.

 

Even if you expect the Holter Monitor to deliver a stable outcome and it may well do, just the fact that this test was ordered changes your status from stable to unstable and you are now subject to satisfying the stability period again.

 

This is how it is in the Canadian insurance companies and I believe that it is the same with American insurance too.

 

Most folks don't recognize that even a reduction of medication dose, or a stoppage of medication changes that status from stable to unstable.