Insurance Claim Rejected After Flight Crew Timing Violation

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
Author: Paige Estritori

Please Note: We do not endorse any specific products or companies. Some content is sourced from third parties, including press releases, and may not be independently verified for accuracy or completeness.

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

Why Battery Fire Risk Belongs on the Salon Insurance Checklist

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent Australian insurance and small business risk commentary has again highlighted lithium-ion battery fires as a practical hazard for workplaces that rely on rechargeable equipment. For beauty salons, skin clinics, nail studios and mobile beauticians, the issue is not limited to obvious items such as laptops or phones. Many everyday tools, including cordless clippers, LED devices, payment terminals, tablets, portable speakers, torches and cleaning equipment, may depend on rechargeable batteries. - read more

Why Insurance Affordability Remains a Practical Issue for Tradies

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent insurance industry commentary has again highlighted the affordability challenge facing Australian policyholders, with premium pressure linked to natural hazard exposure, higher repair costs, reinsurance conditions, claims inflation and state-based charges. While much of the public debate focuses on households, the same forces can flow through to small trade businesses that rely on public liability, tools, vehicles, workshop contents and income-related cover to keep operating. - read more

What the Latest Cyclone Pool Signals Mean for Strata Renewals

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

The latest industry attention on Australia’s Cyclone Reinsurance Pool is a useful reminder that affordability reform is only one part of the strata insurance equation. The pool was designed to reduce the cost pressure created by cyclone risk, particularly across northern Australia, where residential strata schemes can face difficult renewal conditions because of wind, rain, storm surge and ageing building infrastructure. - read more

Cyclone Insurance Review Puts Northern Tradie Risks in Focus

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

A fresh review of Australia’s cyclone reinsurance pool has put insurance access and affordability back in the spotlight for communities and small businesses across northern Australia. The pool was designed to reduce pressure on premiums for cyclone and cyclone-related flood damage by giving insurers access to government-backed reinsurance. - read more

Automation Is Changing Life Cover Decisions

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent industry reporting has put renewed attention on how artificial intelligence and automated decision-making are being used across insurance. For life insurance customers, the issue is not whether technology is good or bad. It is whether faster systems are being used in ways that remain fair, explainable and properly supervised. - read more

Click for more Insurance News