Insurance Claim Rejected After Flight Crew Timing Violation

3

The information on this website is general in nature and does not take into account your objectives, financial situation, or needs. Consider seeking personal advice from a licensed adviser before acting on any information.

The frustrated passenger incurred additional costs when his flight from Palermo to London was unexpectedly stopped because the crew had worked the maximum hours allowed by law. He expected full coverage for these expenses under his travel insurance policy.

However, Lloyd’s Australia, the insurer, denied the claim, stating that the travel policy’s clause on additional expenses and disruption coverage only applies to events such as strikes, riots, hijacks, civil unrest, adverse weather conditions, or accidents involving the mode of transport.

The claimant argued otherwise, insisting that the crew reaching its working hours limit was akin to industrial action such as strikes, implying that the insurer had a too narrow interpretation of the policy's disruption cover. He stated that the restriction on working hours is a precaution to prevent accidents, which aligns with the "spirit of the policy".

Yet, The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) did not accept this reasoning.

AFCA pointed out the scant information provided by the claimant which linked the flight cancellation directly to crew working hours being exceeded. They reinforced that this situation is distinct from a strike.

“A strike constitutes a deliberate refusal to work, whereas regulatory limits on work hours are a constraint and not a chosen action,” noted the AFCA's ombudsman. “Additionally, equating flight crew timing regulations with an accident scenario is not fitting, since the clause in question applies to actual incidents happening, not cancellations meant to forestall potential accidents.”

However, AFCA acknowledged a part of the travel policy which offers coverage for scenarios where a flight is delayed over six hours due to uncontrollable circumstances.

Under this provision, the insurer is required to compensate the complainant with the policy’s cap of $2000.

“Although the insurer claims that these circumstances are specifically excluded by the policy, they failed to indicate which exclusion they are relying on and provide justification for triggering it. Therefore, it is unconvincing that the insurer has adequately clarified its entitlement to decline or reduce the claim under this section,” AFCA concluded.

This case was originally reported by Insurance News Australia.

Published:Monday, 9th Sep 2024
Source: Paige Estritori

Please Note: If this information affects you, seek advice from a licensed professional.

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

Suncorp Reaches Maximum Reinsurance Retention Following Severe Storms in Queensland and NSW

11 Dec 2025: Paige Estritori

Recent supercell thunderstorms in South East Queensland and northern New South Wales have led to a surge in insurance claims, prompting Suncorp to reach its maximum reinsurance retention of $350 million. The insurer has reported over 10,000 claims related to these events, with approximately half pertaining to home damages and the other half to motor vehicles. - read more

NTARC Report Identifies Inattention and Speed as Primary Factors in Major Truck Crashes

11 Dec 2025: Paige Estritori

The National Truck Accident Research Centre (NTARC) has released its latest Major Incident Investigation Report, highlighting inattention, distraction, and inappropriate speed as the most frequent human factors behind major truck crashes in Australia. While there has been a modest reduction in these incidents compared to previous years, they continue to pose significant risks to road safety. - read more

Rising Mental Health Claims Reshape Australia's Insurance Landscape

10 Dec 2025: Paige Estritori

The Australian insurance industry is witnessing a significant shift as mental health conditions have become the leading cause of total and permanent disability (TPD) claims. Recent data from the Council of Australian Life Insurers (CALI) indicates that mental health issues now account for nearly one-third of all TPD claims, marking a substantial change in the industry's claim patterns. - read more

Australian General Insurers Achieve $6 Billion Profit Amid Fewer Natural Disasters

10 Dec 2025: Paige Estritori

In a remarkable turnaround, Australian general insurers have reported a combined profit of $6.1 billion over the past year. This substantial increase is attributed to a period of relative calm in natural catastrophes and robust investment returns. - read more

Australian Life Insurers Under Review for Mental Health Exclusion Practices

10 Dec 2025: Paige Estritori

Recent findings have revealed that certain Australian life insurers continue to implement blanket exclusions for mental health conditions, a practice that contravenes the industry's code of practice. This has raised significant concerns about the fairness and legality of such exclusions. - read more

Click for more Insurance News