Not upheld: claim decline - travel delay benefit complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A claimed on his annual multi-trip travel insurance for a 72-hour delay to a connecting flight from country N to country I during his return journey to the UK. Admiral declined the claim citing an exclusion for delays to connecting transport between two non-UK countries. Mr A argued the exclusion was unreasonably narrow, not adequately highlighted at point of sale, unfair under FCA Consumer Duty requirements, and that the policy wording was ambiguous. The ombudsman found the exclusion was clearly stated in the policy terms and properly highlighted in the IPID, the wording was unambiguous, and Admiral correctly declined the claim based on the cause of the delay rather than its effect.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found the policy wording was clear and unambiguous in excluding delays to connecting transport between two non-UK countries. Although such exclusions are significant and must be highlighted, the ombudsman was satisfied the exclusion was properly highlighted in the IPID. The ombudsman rejected arguments that the wording was ambiguous or should be interpreted in Mr A's favour, and found Admiral correctly assessed the claim based on its cause (the delayed connecting flight) rather than its effect. The ombudsman concluded that while travel insurance doesn't cover every scenario, insurers are entitled to decide what risks to insure provided significant exclusions are highlighted.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website