Not upheld: claim declined - alleged unreasonable decline complaint against Inter Partner Assistance SA

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H and Ms N claimed under their travel insurance policy after missing their outbound flight due to a suspected fire in the airport's main access tunnel, which caused delays in shuttle buses and underground transport, resulting in them arriving at the gate after the flight had closed. IPA declined the claim, and the ombudsman upheld this decision, finding that the circumstances did not fall within the policy's covered events for delayed departure/abandonment (section D) or missed departure (section E). The ombudsman concluded that while sympathising with their situation and financial losses, the policy terms did not provide cover for the specific circumstances that led to them missing their flight, and it would not be fair to interpret the insured events more broadly.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that while sympathising with Mr H and Ms N's situation, the circumstances of their missed flight did not fall within the policy's covered events. Section D requires the flight to be delayed more than 12 hours as a direct result of strike, adverse weather, or mechanical breakdown of scheduled public transport, which was not established. Section E requires failure of scheduled public transport to the departure point, heavy traffic/road closures meeting specific reporting thresholds, or vehicle breakdown/accident, none of which applied. The ombudsman was not persuaded that the insured events were too narrowly construed or that fair interpretation would extend to the circumstances presented.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website