Partially upheld: Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against Inter Partner Assistance SA
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6444360 of 2026-06-23T00:00:00+00:00. Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against Inter Partner Assistance SA. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6444360 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-23T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Inter Partner Assistance SA |
| Product | Travel insurance |
| Claim type | Travel / life insurance claim disputes |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | IPA directed to: (1) Pay £300 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by failure to clearly communicate the claims process; (2) Refund the policy premium if not already done. Payment to be made within 28 days of acceptance of the decision. |
Summary
Mr C and Miss S complained that IPA unfairly declined their travel insurance claim after their daughter required emergency surgery whilst on holiday. IPA declined the claim because the daughter's medical conditions and medication were not disclosed when the policy was taken out in August 2025, despite a clear policy question asking about medical history in the preceding two years. The ombudsman found the question was sufficiently clear and that Mr C and Miss S had failed to take reasonable care in completing it accurately, making the claim decline fair under CIDRA. However, the ombudsman found IPA's advisor failed to clearly explain the claims process during Miss S's initial call, causing unnecessary distress and inconvenience. The complaint was partially upheld, with IPA directed to pay £300 compensation for poor customer service and refund the policy premium.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Under CIDRA 2012, consumers must take reasonable care not to misrepresent facts when taking out insurance. The ombudsman found the medical history question was clear and unambiguous, and Mr C and Miss S had an obligation to answer accurately. The daughter's medical records showed undisclosed medical conditions and medication, constituting a qualifying misrepresentation. IPA's underwriting evidence demonstrated that cover would not have been offered had the information been disclosed. Therefore, voiding the policy and refunding the premium was a fair remedy under CIDRA. However, the ombudsman found IPA failed to communicate the claims process clearly to Miss S during her initial call, causing unnecessary distress and inconvenience, warranting compensation of £300.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Inter Partner Assistance SA, all decisions | 1,644 | 41% |
| Travel / life insurance claim disputes, all decisions | 20,052 | 31% |
| Travel insurance, all decisions | 7,668 | 37% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website