Forum menu
Possibly daft question...
Let's say you have previously had (for example) a tia. I'm going to assume that travel insurance to cover what would be deemed a pre existing condition would be extremely high. Are there no reciprocal arrangements between countries to cover such events?
In my case I was diagnosed 5 years ago with a minor blockage in one of my coronary arteries. I only know about it because I was investigated for something else. It causes no symptoms, doesn't interupt blood flow, and according to the cardiologist similar would be found in a large proportion of folks my age, if they checked for these things, which they don't
But because I know I need to declare it when applying for Insurance and it's nearly always then put down as not covered as a preexisting condition. This despite fact I'm apparently at zero additional risk than you average bloke, and probably far less so than some of the folks you see rolling about the beach in spain
not on the same scale of seriousness, but when I got Bupa through work I had to declare previous issues so I wasn't covered for anything related to my knee due to a rugby injury. A few years later I was able to remove that as a pre-existing condition because there had been no recurrence or need for treatment in the interim. While you would probably still need to declare it, there may be a sliding scale of importance if you have had no problem.
Relating to my earlier comment about the poor reputation of the insurance industry - people tend to think that they will do anything to worm out of paying a claim. Failing to declare something is probably a pretty good way of ensuring that happens - even if you end up trying to claim for something completely unconnected.
Let’s say you have previously had (for example) a tia. I’m going to assume that travel insurance to cover what would be deemed a pre existing condition would be extremely high. Are there no reciprocal arrangements between countries to cover such events?
"It depends". If asked questions that this falls under you declare it and they'll tell you if it's covered (some companies would cover it, some just dont touch anything pre-existing related, some sit somewhere in the middle). If not asked then you need to check the policy wording very carefully. However, as it would be deemed a heart condition you're heading into the world of specialist insurance. Not necessarily a bad thing though as they should understand the risk and will be able to advise accordingly.
Reciprocal agreements are only a very small part of a possible solution. E.g. they dont cover; someone staying out with the patient, changes to flights home, repatriation flights and so on. So the bills can still end up massive.
It’s always their “dream holiday” and never just a normal “all we could afford to be honest” holiday, innit?
Interestingly, in the quad biking article, the family themselves are never quoted as saying 'dream holiday'. That term appears to have been inserted into the story by the tabloid.
Interestingly, in the quad biking article, the family themselves are never quoted as saying ‘dream holiday’.
And yet it is literally used twice in the article, within quote marks. Who are they quoting then?! Piss-poor "journalism" at its finest 🙂
TBH I felt a bit sorry for the people in the quad story, I just don’t think people realise the risk and it doesn’t look like they were properly dressed for it 🙁
Are there no reciprocal arrangements between countries to cover such events?
Well there's the GHIC card, which is meant as a replacement for the EHIC card available while we were in the EU. But I don't think it's worth anything.
And i suspect the UK government aren't going to enter into any arrangements w the US and fund stupidity like the lady in florida. So travel insurance is mandatory really. And if you have anything preexisting go to a specialist who can look at it in more detail.
TBH I felt a bit sorry for the people in the quad story, I just don’t think people realise the risk
Yeah, but ignorance is not really a defence
Some of the less intellectually endowed distant relatives on MrsEpic's side have been talking about trips w/out insurance. fortunately they've so far been persuaded to take insurance or not travel. One of them is bound to FAFO at some point, and they'll get no sympathy here.
Quad biking is rarely covered and not advised for a novice.
Has heart attack. Doesn't tell insurer. Goes on holiday to get over heart attack.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpd11zq3engo.amp
Chap (seemingly) goes on bender with mates to Thailand, gets attacked. No medical cover.
Any travel insurance I have looked at has being drunk in the exclusions anyway. So he may be no worse off than he would have been with a policy in place
Any travel insurance I have looked at has being drunk in the exclusions anyway. So he may be no worse off than he would have been with a policy in place
Tough to reject the claim on the basis that he beat himself up because he was drunk though. If he'd fallen down a flight of stairs or something because he was drinking, that's the sort of time that exclusion could kick in
Any travel insurance I have looked at has being drunk in the exclusions anyway. So he may be no worse off than he would have been with a policy in place
Although I don't doubt he was, there's not even any suggestion in the article that he'd been drinking, and seemingly no witnesses to whatever happened & no evidence either way. Unless he was daft & admitted it to the insurance company when asked what happened (like that squaddie who went hiking in flip-flops!) they'd have no basis to deny the claim.
Agreed. There are some cases where the ombudsman has taken that point. There was one I remember were the claimant admitted to a few drinks, and then was flattened by a car being driven at night without lights at speed (and I think the driver was drunk). Insurer said no claim due to alcohol. Ombudsman made them pay.
Similarly years ago there was something about a teen falling off the back of a scooter while tiddly, with no helmet. Something was talked about that if she was sober, she'd have had her helmet on. But because a bit drunk, she didn't and suffered a fractured skull. Can't remember what happened in the end. She had the helmet in her hand.
"not even any suggestion in the article that he'd been drinking, and seemingly no witnesses to whatever happened & no evidence either way. "
Presumably hospital blood tests? While the article doesn't mention alcohol and he may in fact be teetotal usually a night "partying" involves alcohol.
https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/25231936.ashton-jones-fighting-life-thailand/
It is an interesting question though. The ombudsman seems to say two or three drinks is OK. Many holidaymakers will be well over. The motto would seem to be deny everything. Say you had two pints. Up to the insurer to prove different.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/sep/23/ombudsman-insurance-claims-alcohol-abuse
Also a bit of pot luck as to what Ombudsman reviews your claim?
"If you go to a stag party in Magaluf and have an accident on the way back from the bar to your hotel, how much do you need to drink to have your travel insurance claim declined? Nine drinks spaced over several hours was not enough according to Ombudsman Timothy Bailey. In another case, however, where a Mr. J had had ‘a couple of drinks but nothing silly’ before his accident the ombudsman, Joe Scott accepted that his judgment was clouded by his drinking and upheld the refusal of the insurer to pay the claim."
https://www.ias.org.uk/2020/11/18/alcohol-problems-and-insurance/
While the article doesn't mention alcohol and he may in fact be teetotal usually a night "partying" involves alcohol.
Other drugs are, apparently, available. 😉
Sounds like a an issue people should probably be aware of. Kind of obvious when you think about it but given Christmas and holidays are the two times of the year when people drink the most....Obviously the vast vast majority of people get away with it as even if they have an issue where alcohol 'may' have played a part they are still walking wounded and the costs won't have become 'sell your house' levels.
Similarly years ago there was something about a teen falling off the back of a scooter while tiddly, with no helmet. Something was talked about that if she was sober, she'd have had her helmet on. But because a bit drunk, she didn't and suffered a fractured skull. Can't remember what happened in the end. She had the helmet in her hand.
Scooters and mopeds are generally excluded anyway, but (tellingly) having a full licence and hiring a motorbike is ok