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

Envest Group Unveils TLI Underwriting for Heavy Motor Fleets

13 Nov 2025: Paige Estritori

Envest Group, a prominent player in Australia's insurance sector, has announced the launch of TLI Underwriting, a new agency dedicated to providing specialised insurance solutions for heavy motor fleet operators. This strategic move aims to address the unique challenges faced by larger transport businesses in Australia. - read more

AFCA Directs AIA to Pay Truck Driver's TPD Benefit After Decade-Long Dispute

13 Nov 2025: Paige Estritori

In a significant ruling by the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), insurance provider AIA has been directed to pay a total and permanent disability (TPD) benefit to a truck driver, concluding a protracted dispute that spanned over a decade. - read more

ICA Proposes Reforms to Reduce Insurance Costs in Queensland

13 Nov 2025: Paige Estritori

The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) has recently submitted a series of recommendations to the Queensland Productivity Commission, aiming to address escalating insurance costs and bolster housing resilience across the state. These proposals are particularly pertinent to tradespeople, who are integral to the construction and maintenance of Queensland's housing infrastructure. - read more

NSW Builders Advised to Obtain Professional Indemnity Insurance Before 2026

13 Nov 2025: Paige Estritori

In light of recent legislative changes, BizCover is urging registered building practitioners in New South Wales (NSW) to secure professional indemnity (PI) insurance well ahead of the July 1, 2026 compliance deadline. This advisory follows the extension of the enforcement date under the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2021, which now mandates that builders hold PI insurance deemed sufficient to cover potential liabilities. - read more

Significant Premium Reductions in Australian Construction Insurance Market

13 Nov 2025: Paige Estritori

The Australian construction insurance market has experienced a notable shift in 2025, with premiums decreasing across various lines due to intensified competition among insurers. According to Marsh's Construction Insurance Market Update 2025, the first half of the year saw average premium reductions ranging from 5% to 15%, marking a significant departure from the upward trend observed in 2024. - read more

Click for more Insurance News