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

Navigating the Surge in Insurance Risks for Australian Businesses

18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

Australian businesses are currently grappling with a complex landscape of escalating insurance risks, driven by factors such as increased litigation, rapid technological advancements, supply chain disruptions, catastrophic events, and geopolitical tensions. These challenges necessitate a proactive approach to risk management and insurance coverage. - read more

Learning from Near Misses: Enhancing Farm Safety in Australia

18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

In July 2025, Farmsafe Australia launched the 'Second Chances - Who Knows How Many You'll Get' campaign, aiming to transform near misses on farms into learning opportunities to prevent future accidents. This initiative underscores the critical importance of recognising and addressing close calls in agricultural settings. - read more

WFI's 2025 Farm Accident Insights: A Call for Enhanced Safety Measures

18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

In October 2025, WFI Insurance unveiled its annual farm accident insights as part of Farmsafe Australia's 2025 Safer Farms Report. The findings paint a stark picture of the challenges facing Australian agriculture, with 2024 recording 72 farm-related deaths-the highest in over two decades. - read more

ASIC Highlights Deficiencies in Insurers' Complaint Handling Practices

18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has recently conducted a comprehensive review of insurers' complaint handling processes, uncovering significant deficiencies that fail to meet regulatory obligations. The findings indicate that insurers are not adequately identifying and addressing customer complaints, with one in six complaints going unrecognized. Additionally, systemic issues are often overlooked, communication timeframes are missed, and existing systems fail to record outcomes such as compensation payments. - read more

Forecast: Continued Decline in Australian Commercial Insurance Rates Through 2026

18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

Following a significant 12% decline in commercial insurance rates during the fourth quarter of 2025, industry experts anticipate that this downward trend will persist throughout 2026. The Australia-Pacific region has been at the forefront of this global decrease, with the recent drop marking the steepest since early 2024. - read more

Click for more Insurance News