Not upheld: claim declined - application of war and hostilities exclusion complaint against Zurich Insurance Company Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R held a travel insurance policy and was travelling when the FCDO advised against all but essential travel to the UAE due to conflict in the wider region in March 2026. Mr R changed his planned route home to avoid the UAE and incurred additional costs, which he claimed on his policy. Zurich declined the claim relying on a general exclusion for war, hostilities and warlike operations. The ombudsman found that Zurich reasonably applied the exclusion, as the UAE was impacted by conflict including missile and drone attacks. Although sympathetic to Mr R's pragmatic decision to re-route, the ombudsman concluded that travel insurance policies do not cover every eventuality and insurers are entitled to specify covered risks. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the policy contained a clear general exclusion for war, hostilities and warlike operations which applied to all sections of the policy. The UAE was impacted by conflict in the wider geographical area in early March 2026, including missile and drone attacks. Zurich reasonably concluded the exclusion applied. Travel insurance policies do not cover every eventuality, and insurers are entitled to specify the risks they are prepared to cover as a commercial decision. The war exclusion is a common policy term appearing in many travel insurance policies. Therefore, it would not be fair and reasonable to direct Zurich to pay the claim outside of the policy terms.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website