Upheld: unfair claim rejection - additional transport costs complaint against AWP P&C S.A.
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6384700 of 2026-05-27T00:00:00+00:00. unfair claim rejection - additional transport costs complaint against AWP P&C S.A.. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6384700 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-27T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | AWP P&C S.A. |
| Product | travel insurance |
| Claim type | unfair claim rejection - additional transport costs |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | AWP P&C S.A. must pay Mr G £1,153.14 plus 8% simple interest per annum from the date Mr G purchased the flight until settlement is paid. If HM Revenue & Customs requires income tax deduction, AWP must inform Mr G of the amount deducted and provide a tax deduction certificate upon request. |
Summary
Mr G claimed under his travel insurance policy for the cost of a premium economy return flight (£1,153.14) purchased after he remained abroad longer than his original return date following surgery. AWP rejected the claim, arguing Mr G could have taken his original flight with an agreed business class upgrade. The ombudsman found that while medical evidence did not strictly support Mr G's need to remain abroad, AWP's agreement to pay for a business class upgrade meant it was fair and reasonable to reimburse Mr G for the premium economy flight at a similar cost. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and directed AWP to pay £1,153.14 plus 8% interest, noting AWP's failure to provide evidence of the business class upgrade cost.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
While the policy terms strictly limited cover to medically necessary stays abroad, and the medical evidence did not support that Mr G needed to remain abroad, the ombudsman applied a fair and reasonable test rather than strict policy interpretation. Since AWP had agreed that a business class upgrade was medically necessary and would have paid for this higher class of travel, it was fair and reasonable to reimburse Mr G for the premium economy flight he actually purchased at £1,153.14, which was likely similar in cost to the business class upgrade AWP would have funded. AWP's failure to provide evidence of the business class upgrade cost despite an extended deadline meant the ombudsman relied on Mr G's evidence and independent research to determine the fair amount.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| AWP P&C S.A., all decisions | 235 | 30% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website