U K Insurance Limited · DRN-5130263

The complaint Mrs and Mr W complain that U K Insurance Limited (UKI) unfairly settled their travel insurance claim. My references to UKI include its agents. What happened Mrs and Mr W have travel insurance through a building society account, the insurer is UKI. They flew from the UK to Spain where they had planned to board a cruise the next day. Unfortunately when they arrived at passport control in Spain Mrs W realised her passport was missing. She was allowed to enter Spain to obtain an emergency passport which only allowed travel back to the UK. So Mrs and Mr W flew back home and missed the cruise. They claimed for the cost of the missed cruise, which was substantial, and their additional costs. UKI paid for Mrs and Mr W’s costs involved in obtaining the emergency passport and returning to the UK. It said the claim for the cost of the cruise wasn’t covered under the policy terms. Mrs and Mr W complained to us. They said UKI had been ‘dismissive’ of their claim. They believed the cruise cost was covered because the policy said under the cancellation section that if a passport was stolen within seven days before departure there was cover. Our Investigator said UKI had fairly assessed the claim under the “Cutting Short Your Trip (after your trip has started)” section of the policy and the claim wasn’t covered by the policy terms. Mrs and Mr W disagree and want an Ombudsman’s decision. They thought UKI only chose the policy terms which suited it. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. The relevant rules and industry guidelines say UKI has a responsibility to handle claims promptly and fairly. It shouldn’t reject (or settle) a claim unreasonably. Mrs and Mr W refer to policy wording under the “Cancelling Your Trip (up to the point of departure)” section of the policy which says UKI will pay up to the policy limit for each insured person if “your passport or visa is stolen in the seven days before your departure on your trip and you can’t arrange a replacement in time”. UKI didn’t assess the claim under the cancellation section because Mrs and Mr W had already departed on their trip as they had already left their home. The policy defines ‘trip’ as: “A journey that begins and ends at your home during the period of insurance that is: • Outside the UK

-- 1 of 3 --

• Within the UK, where you are staying in pre-booked commercially operated accommodation for two or more consecutive nights”. Most, if not all, travel insurance policies have the same or a very similar definition of ‘trip’. So UKI acted reasonably by not assessing the claim under the cancellation section. UKI fairly assessed Mrs and Mr W’s claim using the “Cutting Short Your Trip (after your trip has started)” section of the policy, as Mrs and Mr W’s trip had started as they had left their home. That section sets out the insured events UKI will cover: 1. Death, illness or injury: the death, serious injury or illness of any insured person, your travelling companion, a close relative, a colleague or anyone outside your home area that you had planned to stay with. 2. Court cases and quarantine: any insured person, your travelling companion or anyone outside your home area that you had planned to stay with is quarantined or called for jury service or as a witness in a court and a court official has refused to postpone it. 3. Armed forces and emergency services: as a member of the British Armed Forces or Emergency Services, any insured person or your travelling companion has authorised leave cancelled due to an unexpected emergency. 4. Fire, storm, flood or burglary: any insured person or your travelling companion has to return to their home or their usual place of business in the UK as a result of it being seriously damaged by fire, storm, flood or burglary that happened after your departure on your trip. 5. FCO travel advice: Foreign & Commonwealth Office advice against ‘All travel’ or ‘All but essential travel’ to your destination, provided that advice came into force after your departure on your trip. 6. Natural disaster: you are forced to move from your pre-booked and pre-paid accommodation due to the immediately surrounding area being badly affected by a natural disaster. If you can’t continue with your trip we will return you to your home area. If you can continue with your trip we will pay the extra travel and accommodation costs for each insured person or the costs to cut short your trip, whichever is lower.” Mrs and Mr W suggested to UKI that ‘burglary’, which is listed as an insured event at point 4 above, fits their circumstances. Burglary isn’t defined in the policy so I think it’s reasonable for me to consider the dictionary definition for the usual everyday meaning of the word. The dictionary definitions I’ve seen of ‘burglary’ are around someone entering a building intending to steal or commit a crime. So, even if there was evidence that Mrs W’s passport had been stolen, I don’t think that’s the same as her having to return to her home in the UK as a result of her home being seriously damaged by burglary that happened after her departure on her trip. UKI reasonably said point 4 above wasn’t applicable to Mrs and Mr W’s claim circumstances. I don’t think UKI was dismissive of Mrs and Mr W’s claim or chose the policy terms to suit it, as they suggest. UKI responded to the main points Mrs and Mr W made about why they thought their claim should be covered. As I’ve explained above, UKI acted reasonably in saying the claim’s circumstances meant it wasn’t a claim that could be considered under the “Cancelling Your Trip (up to the point of departure)” section of the policy. And UKI fairly assessed the claim under the “Cutting Short Your Trip (after your trip has started)” section of the policy and decided the claim wasn’t covered. Travel insurance doesn’t cover every situation and I’m satisfied that UKI fairly said Mrs and Mr W’s claim for the cost of the missed cruise wasn’t covered by the policy terms. I also need to consider what’s a fair and reasonable outcome to the complaint. I’m sorry for the

-- 2 of 3 --

upsetting situation Mrs and Mr W found themselves in and I’ve seen that the cruise cost is a substantial amount. But there’s no basis on which I can reasonably say that it would be fair for UKI to pay the cost of the missed cruise. UKI fairly settled the claim by paying the costs involved in Mrs and Mr W obtaining the emergency passport and returning to the UK, as covered by the policy. My final decision I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs W and Mr W to accept or reject my decision before 30 January 2025. Nicola Sisk Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --