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

What PSC’s Transport Broker Investment Means for Truck Operators

02 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

PSC Insurance Brokers’ investment in MA Insurance Brokers is a timely reminder that transport insurance in Australia is becoming more specialised, more relationship-driven and more closely tied to claims performance. The deal, announced on 25 June 2026, sees MA begin operating as PSC Transport Insurance Brokers, with founders Barry Mathison and Mariann Illyes remaining involved as managing principals. - read more

Cancer Claim Decision Shows Why Policy Wording Matters

01 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

A new Australian Financial Complaints Authority decision has underlined a point that is easy to overlook when buying personal insurance: a serious diagnosis does not always mean a policy benefit will be payable. The ruling, reported on 29 June 2026, involved a claimant who sought benefits after being diagnosed with high-grade urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Although the illness was serious and required treatment, AFCA found the insurer was entitled to rely on the specific wording of the policy. - read more

What Renewal Price Transparency Means for Boat Owners

01 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

A new review by the General Insurance Code Governance Committee has put renewal pricing transparency back under the spotlight, with findings that matter well beyond home and motor policies. For Australian boat owners, the message is simple: when your policy renewal arrives, the payment frequency can be just as important as the headline premium. - read more

What IAG’s Modular Shelter Move Means for SMEs

01 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

IAG’s latest investment through Firemark Ventures is a useful signal for Australian business owners: disaster recovery is no longer just about paying claims after the event. It is increasingly about helping people and enterprises stay operational, connected and on-site while rebuilding happens around them. - read more

Life Insurance Code Review Puts Mental Health and Claims Fairness in Focus

01 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

Australia’s life insurance sector is facing another important reform moment after the independent review of the Life Insurance Code of Practice released its final report on 30 June 2026. The report, led by former senior regulator Peter Kell, makes 85 recommendations aimed at improving how life insurers communicate, design products, handle claims and support customers who may be vulnerable. - read more

Click for more Insurance News