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 Northern Strata Schemes Still Face Insurance Cost Pressure

19 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh industry attention on insurance affordability in northern Australia has reinforced a message many strata communities already understand: premium relief is not delivered by a single reform, even where government-backed risk sharing is in place. For apartment buildings, townhouse complexes and mixed-use strata schemes exposed to cyclone, storm surge, flood or severe rainfall, insurers are still looking closely at the physical characteristics of each building before deciding price, excesses and available cover. - read more

Insurance Summit Agenda Puts Life Cover Strategy in Focus

19 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

The agenda for the 2026 AFR Insurance Summit points to an insurance sector that is increasingly focused on affordability, technology, trust and operational resilience. While much of the summit is framed around the broader insurance market, the themes are highly relevant for employers, CFOs and directors reviewing corporate life insurance, group salary continuance, key person cover and executive protection arrangements. - read more

Insurance Complaint Trends Are a Timely Warning for Tradies

19 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh complaint trends across the Australian insurance market are another reminder that the real test of any policy often comes after something has gone wrong. While many disputes involve household cover, the same pressure points can affect tradies who rely on tools, vehicles, plant, public liability cover and income protection to keep work moving. - read more

Life Insurance Code Review Puts Customer Treatment Back in Focus

19 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

The review of Australia’s Life Insurance Code of Practice has moved from a broad governance discussion into a more practical question for households: what should good insurer behaviour look like when people apply for cover, update a policy or make a claim? - read more

What the Next Advice Reform Steps Mean for Business Cover

19 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Australia’s financial advice reform agenda has moved from broad policy debate into the more practical question of how advice will be delivered, documented and accessed. For business owners, this matters because life insurance decisions are rarely isolated personal choices. They often intersect with debt facilities, director guarantees, shareholder agreements, succession plans and family wealth protection. - read more

Click for more Insurance News