Insurers refusing to cover Bangkok airport protest a disgrace
The Sunday Times lamented the fact that hundred of Brits stranded at besieged airports in Thailand would have their insurance clams turned down.
The ABI waded in to defend the indefensible, pointing out, after the event, that such civil disobedience is not covered.
Had it been a strike or sabotage by workers, instead of a peaceful protest by outsiders, it would have been covered. And to cover this kind of incident would add probably pence to a policy and at the most a few pounds.
This kind of nonsense gives insurers as whole a bad name. When the passengers travelled and bought their travel insurance it was for exactly this kind of thing they thought they were buying cover. The Sunday Times quoted people who had spent money in good faith believing they could reclaim it later.
You can guarantee that nobody selling them insurance pointed out that these things were not covered. I have travelled abroad on travel insurance I subsequently found did not cover my chosen form of transport – a road legal UK-registered and insured motorcycle – yet nobody told me before I left, or asked the question when recommending my travel cover.
Insurers and brokers alike have to do something to improve travel insurance and the poor reputation it brings to the whole industry.
At the bottom of the public credibility list, just below estate agents and journalists, are travel insurers. It is a reputation travel insurers deserve, but not one they need to keep.
Websites
