Travel insurance claim for cancellation due to Zika pandemic

Triptych

Hi,

Not sure if this is the exact right spot to ask this, so apologies if not.

I was wondering if an insurance company will pay out for the cancellation of a holiday due to pregnancy if the holiday is in an area where Zika is prevalent?

Doctor's advice is not to travel due to the obvious risks. However, my fear is that because the Maldives was already identified as a Zika risk at the time of booking any claim will be deemed invalid. (Despite the absence of pregnancy at time of booking)

Any insight would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

endacl

My feeling is that, as you'll be dealing with an insurance company, you may forget about it for the reasons you've outlined above.

Browney7

You need to read your policy conditions carefully before even thinking of sending in a claim to ensure you have your ducks in a row.

Atlantic Dawn

You became pregnant after the booking so there is zero chance as the area was already identified as having a Zika risk.

RoYoBo

I wouldn't be quite so sure that it's as cut and dried as people are saying - depending on the policy T&Cs, of course.

People get sick, break limbs, have relatives become terminally ill etc - all subsequent to booking holidays/insurance and are still covered. If the pregnancy was deemed to be unplanned (as are the other insurable events) I really don't see why it wouldn't be covered? Surely that's the whole point of insurance - to cover you for the unexpected and the unplanned?

If someone broke both their legs on an icy pavement, for example, and they were unable to go on a skiing holiday, it would be unrealistic to expect that they shouldn't have risked going out in the cold before their holiday. Despite the best of precautions, pregnancy happens unless one becomes totally celibate, so equally as unrealistic.

A doctor has advised not going on the holiday as a result of an event that occurred subsequent to booking and insuring a holiday. It's very much worth following it up IMO.

Sue Pa Key Pa

You cannot claim for fear of loss. No incident has occurred that has prevented the poster from travelling. The fact the person has become pregnant does not stop them from going on the holiday

miamee

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

You cannot claim for fear of loss. No incident has occurred that has prevented the poster from travelling. The fact the person has become pregnant does not stop them from going on the holiday

Would medical advice against travelling for the safety of your baby not count as an incident that prevents going? Common sense says yes but it is an insurance company. I guess reading the T&Cs with a fine toothcomb is the first thing to do OP so that you know what you are./are not entitled to before you even contact them.

Sue Pa Key Pa

miamee wrote: »

Would medical advice against travelling for the safety of your baby not count as an incident that prevents going? Common sense says yes but it is an insurance company. I guess reading the T&Cs with a fine toothcomb is the first thing to do OP so that you know what you are./are not entitled to before you even contact them.

If the medical practitioner instructs the person not to travel on medical grounds they might have reason to claim. As I said, fear of loss is not a reason to have a valid claim and contracting the virus is not a certainty and, even if contracted, long term effects are not guaranteed. By booking a holiday in an area known to have widespread instances of the virus, you weaken your case, even if you are not pregnant at the time. That's where the common sense lies

Triptych

Many thanks for the insights. The Doc is advising not to travel. WHO also say that pregnant women should not travel to this location so there may be some hope for a claim.

As said above, the challenge is to have all the ducks in a row here :eek: