Travel Insurance

[Lako42]

Anyone ever insured with holidaysafe.co.uk


Just got a cracking deal with them.

 

[Hazzman]

Twinned with sat care ain't they?

 

[LCFCmonkey]

Anyone ever insured with holidaysafe.co.uk


Just got a cracking deal with them.

I normally just use one of the price comparison site, and go for the cheapest one that i've heard of.

 

[Fox Fan]

When I was looking for holiday cover for my trip to Hong Kong last year I found that some policies don't cover you if your under the influence of alcohol. Obviously I want to be able to have a drink without voiding my cover.

 

[fosseboy83]

When I was looking for holiday cover for my trip to Hong Kong last year I found that some policies don't cover you if your under the influence of alcohol. Obviously I want to be able to have a drink without voiding my cover.

bloody hell, thats something i'd never have considered checking for before

 

[SJN-Fox]

When I was looking for holiday cover for my trip to Hong Kong last year I found that some policies don't cover you if your under the influence of alcohol. Obviously I want to be able to have a drink without voiding my cover.

I think you'll find that most insurances will not cover you for accidents etc that have occured following the consumption of alcohol (whether directly related or not).

 

[Nottingham Fox]

I always use http://www.insureandgo.com/ - they insure the kiddies FOC, and the price always seems reasonable.

 

[Fox Fan]

I found about half did and half didn't. It takes a long time to look through their policy documents, but a ctrl f search for alcohol speeded it up considerably.

 

[FryattFox]

Go via Quidco to get approx. 15% cashback.

(Or I'm sure Jeff has some of his own links.)

 

[bocadillo]

I think you'll find that most insurances will not cover you for accidents etc that have occured following the consumption of alcohol (whether directly related or not).

It seems to me that you have interpreted what you have read in an unduly pessimistic manner. The fact that the person has drunk alcohol must in some way have a direct or indirect bearing on the loss; if it had no bearing on the loss, the claim would still be payable. The simple fact that the person drunk alcohol can not be a reason for striking out the claim.

The relevant clause will read something like, "No section of this policy shall apply in respect of any claim arising directly or indirectly from using alcohol or drugs (unless the drugs have been prescribed by a doctor)".

 

[lazzer]

It seems to me that you have interpreted what you have read in an unduly pessimistic manner. The fact that the person has drunk alcohol must in some way have a direct or indirect bearing on the loss; if it had no bearing on the loss, the claim would still be payable. The simple fact that the person drunk alcohol can not be a reason for striking out the claim.

The relevant clause will read something like, "No section of this policy shall apply in respect of any claim arising directly or indirectly from using alcohol or drugs (unless the drugs have been prescribed by a doctor)".

So if if you drink 15 pints of San Miguel and get burgled whilst you are at the bar then you get weighed in. But on the other hand if you then proceed to swan dive off the balcony and miss the pool then you have shot it. :icon_wink

 

[SJN-Fox]

It seems to me that you have interpreted what you have read in an unduly pessimistic manner. The fact that the person has drunk alcohol must in some way have a direct or indirect bearing on the loss; if it had no bearing on the loss, the claim would still be payable. The simple fact that the person drunk alcohol can not be a reason for striking out the claim.

The relevant clause will read something like, "No section of this policy shall apply in respect of any claim arising directly or indirectly from using alcohol or drugs (unless the drugs have been prescribed by a doctor)".

That's as maybe, however, there have been cases on Watchdog and the likes where insurance companies have used the fact that a claimant has consumed alcohol (even where the amount is maybe only a single glass of wine) to avoid settling a claim. Now I'm not saying that this is right or wrong, simply that it has happened.

 

[bocadillo]

That's as maybe, however, there have been cases on Watchdog and the likes where insurance companies have used the fact that a claimant has consumed alcohol (even where the amount is maybe only a single glass of wine) to avoid settling a claim. Now I'm not saying that this is right or wrong, simply that it has happened.

In certain circumstances that may be reasonable. It would be unreasonable to do it in every case and I'm sure no insurance company would seek to do so in every case.

I think they are absolutely correct to do so when the drinking of alcohol has led to the injury/loss.