A couple took out travel insurance for an overseas holiday. While travelling, they were both injured in an accident involving a rented motorised scooter and needed medical treatment. The scooter was also damaged.
They made a travel insurance claim for their medical expenses and for the damage to the scooter.
The insurer declined the claim. It said the policy excluded cover for injuries and losses arising from riding motorised scooters unless an optional add-on benefit had been purchased. The couple had not selected this additional cover when they bought the policy.
The couple complained to the IFSO Scheme. They said riding a scooter was a common and ordinary way for tourists to get around in the country they were visiting, and that they were not clearly warned this activity was excluded. They also believed the policy wording was unclear or misleading.
Our decision
We assess complaints by looking at the facts, the law, and the contract.
We looked carefully at the policy wording, the insurer’s online purchase process, and the information shown to customers when choosing optional benefits.
The policy clearly excluded cover for claims arising from riding motorised scooters unless an optional add-on benefit was purchased. Similar exclusions, with the option to buy additional cover, are standard in travel insurance policies across
the industry.
We also considered whether the exclusion was unusual or onerous, and whether the insurer was required to bring it more clearly to the couple’s attention. The exclusion was not unusual. The insurer’s website also visually highlighted that scooter use required additional cover and provided further information through pop-up explanations during the online purchase process.
While we understood the couple’s concerns, our role is not to override clear policy exclusions or require an insurer to make payments outside the policy terms.
We found the insurer had correctly applied the policy and was entitled to rely on the exclusion.
The complaint was not upheld.
