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

AFCA Upholds Policyholder's Income Protection Benefits Against Zurich

12 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) has recently ruled against Zurich Insurance, instructing the insurer to maintain the current income protection benefits for a policyholder after an 11-year delay in proposing a reduction. This decision underscores the critical importance of timely and transparent communication between insurers and their clients. - read more

Neos Recognized as Leading Income Protection Insurer in 2025

12 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

In the 2025 Life Insurance Awards presented by Money Magazine, Neos has been honored as the top provider in the Income Protection Insurance category. This accolade reflects Neos's commitment to delivering comprehensive and reliable income protection solutions to Australians. - read more

Northern Australian Marinas Struggle with Rising Insurance Costs

12 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

Marina operators in Northern Australia are confronting a significant crisis as insurance premiums escalate dramatically, with some experiencing increases exceeding 300% over recent years. This surge in costs is placing immense financial strain on the industry, prompting urgent calls for government intervention. - read more

GT Insurance Provides Flexible Solutions Amid Global Trade Shifts

12 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

As global trade dynamics undergo significant shifts, GT Insurance is reaffirming its commitment to supporting marine clients navigating these challenges. The recent imposition of US tariffs-25% on Australian steel and aluminium, and 10% on other exported goods-has introduced new uncertainties for local exporters, particularly in sectors like beef and bulk freight. These tariffs, effective from April 5, 2025, have prompted concerns about declining export volumes and reduced freight margins. - read more

Business NSW Advocates for Urgent Insurance Reforms to Alleviate Rising Premiums

12 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori

Business NSW, the leading business advocacy group in New South Wales, has raised alarms over the escalating insurance premiums that are placing significant financial strain on businesses across the state. Recent findings from their Business Conditions Survey reveal that nearly 80% of businesses have encountered double-digit increases in insurance costs over the past year, with one in three reporting hikes of 30% or more. These surges starkly contrast with the annual inflation rate of 2. - read more

Click for more Insurance News