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

School Holiday Travel Highlights a New Test for Insurance Cover

05 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

Australia’s winter school holiday rush has put travel insurance back in the spotlight, with families heading to Bali, Fiji and Thailand, skiers travelling to New Zealand and domestic holidaymakers chasing either snow or sunshine closer to home. But this year’s peak period is unfolding against a more unsettled backdrop: geopolitical tension, airspace closures, airline disruption and a growing expectation that insurers should do more than reimburse costs after the event. - read more

Why Pre-Existing Medical Conditions Need Extra Attention Before You Travel

28 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

Australian travellers with pre-existing medical conditions have been given a timely reminder to look beyond price when arranging travel insurance, with recently updated consumer guidance placing renewed emphasis on disclosure, medical assessments and policy wording. - read more

Medical Timing Decides Travel Insurance Claim Dispute

21 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

A recent travel insurance dispute reported by Insurance News has put a spotlight on one of the most important parts of any cancellation claim: timing. The case involved a policyholder who argued that a doctor’s declaration that he could not travel overseas was the relevant claimable event, rather than the earlier appearance of illness. The policyholder was successful, reinforcing that the way a medical issue is documented can be just as important as the condition itself. - read more

SCTI Highlights Increase in Domestic Travel Insurance Claims and Coverage Gaps

14 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

Southern Cross Travel Insurance (SCTI) has reported a significant increase in domestic travel insurance claims, shedding light on the existing coverage gaps among Australian travellers. In the first eight and a half months of 2025, SCTI settled over $240,000 in claims related to local and interstate trips. - read more

Allianz Partners Strengthens Australian Presence with nib Acquisition

07 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

In a significant development within the Australian travel insurance industry, Allianz Partners has announced the acquisition of a substantial portion of nib Group's travel insurance portfolio in Australia and New Zealand. This strategic move, valued at up to A$50 million, marks a pivotal expansion for Allianz Partners in the Asia-Pacific region. - read more

Click for more Insurance News