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

Scooter Accidents Put Travel Insurance Fine Print Back in Focus

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent consumer attention on scooter and moped accidents overseas has highlighted a travel risk many Australians underestimate until something goes wrong. Hiring a scooter in Bali, Thailand, Vietnam or parts of Europe can feel like a simple holiday convenience, but insurers may treat it very differently from catching a taxi or joining a tour. - read more

Why US Trips Deserve a Careful Travel Insurance Check

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh consumer attention on travel to the United States has again highlighted one of the clearest reasons Australians buy travel insurance: overseas medical costs can be severe, and the US is a destination where even a short hospital visit may become financially stressful. For travellers planning holidays, business trips, cruises that call at US ports, or family visits, the issue is less about whether to buy cover and more about whether the policy is strong enough for the trip. - read more

Why Card-Included Travel Insurance Needs a Closer Look

19 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent consumer attention on complimentary credit card travel insurance is a timely reminder that 'included' does not always mean automatic, comprehensive or suitable for every trip. For many Australians, card-linked cover can be a useful benefit, particularly where it is backed by a reputable insurer and activated correctly. The risk is assuming it works like a standalone policy without checking the fine print. - read more

New Travel Insurance Ratings Put Value Ahead of Price Alone

12 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Canstar's latest travel insurance ratings have given Australian travellers another reminder that the cheapest policy is not always the best fit for a trip. With international holidays, cruises, domestic breaks and multi-destination itineraries all carrying different risks, the latest assessment reinforces the importance of weighing price against the practical strength of the cover. - read more

Bali Flight Disruptions Put Natural Disaster Cover in the Spotlight

04 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Renewed flight disruption around Bali has put natural disaster cover back in focus for Australian travellers, after volcanic ash activity in Indonesia again showed how quickly a straightforward holiday can become a logistical and financial problem. When airlines delay, cancel or reroute services, travellers may face extra accommodation, meals, transport, missed tours and rearranged connections, often before they have a clear answer on what their insurer will pay. - read more

Click for more Insurance News