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

Steadfast Group Under Scrutiny for Alleged Misleading Practices

24 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori

Steadfast Group, Australia's largest general insurance broker network, has recently come under scrutiny following allegations of misleading clients through undisclosed financial arrangements. These claims have prompted the company to suspend trading on the Australian Stock Exchange, leading to a significant decline in its share price. - read more

Netstrata Clients Uncover Excessive Insurance Brokerage Fees

24 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent developments have brought to light concerns regarding the insurance practices of Netstrata, a prominent strata management firm in Australia. Clients have reported the sudden appearance of past insurance invoices in their online portals, revealing brokerage fees significantly higher than industry norms. - read more

ICA Calls for Reforms to Victoria's Strata Laws Amid Rising Insurance Costs

24 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori

The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) has called for significant reforms to Victoria's strata legislation, highlighting that poor governance and deferred maintenance are leading to increased insurance premiums for the one in five Victorians residing in strata-titled properties. In a submission to the Expert Panel Review of the Owners Corporations Act 2006, the ICA emphasized that building defects are costing Australians an estimated $1. - read more

Allianz Partners Highlights Risks of Travelling Uninsured

23 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent research conducted by the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) has unveiled a concerning trend: approximately 14% of Australian travellers embark on international journeys without any form of travel insurance. This statistic has prompted Allianz Partners to urge Australians to reconsider the importance of securing adequate coverage before travelling abroad. - read more

Surge in Medical Claims Among Australian Travellers Highlights Importance of Comprehensive Insurance

23 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori

In 2024, medical incidents emerged as the leading cause of travel insurance claims among Australian travellers, accounting for more than 40% of all claims handled by nib Travel. This trend underscores the critical importance of securing comprehensive travel insurance to mitigate the financial risks associated with medical emergencies abroad. - read more

Click for more Insurance News