Should you ‘bank’ on your travel insurance?

The problem with any bundled product from banks is that they are prone to changing them and hiding the sting amongst the small print. Banks just are not reliable enough to sell complex products. However you can meet minimum funding requirements by sending a smaller amount round and back by standing orders

My Nationwide Flexaccount includes travel insurance. This is not a packaged account, just a run-of-the-mill current account. We already have joint worldwide travel cover which we regard as our proper and comprehensive insurance and the one on which we would make a claim. In the small print of our main insurer’s policy, however, I have noticed that where cover is provided by another insurer the claim will also be referred to them and the settlement of the claim will be divided between them. I see this as an unnecessary complication and there could be a disagreement between the two insurers as to whether the claim will be met and to what extent; it can only prolong the process. It might be tempting not to disclose the existence of the other cover but that would be very risky because all insurers contribute to a common database and a check would quickly reveal the duplicate cover and the claim could then be rejected on the grounds of incomplete disclosure.

I’m not sure if anyone else does this, but before a lengthy holiday outside of Europe I move my basic current account to a packaged account to take advantage of two things – the travel insurance and mobile phone insurance. I then cancel this and move back to a basic account when I get back. It works out around the same price, if maybe a bit more, but I like the cover it gives too over some of the cheaper travel insurance deals.

There are of course downsides. Moving to a packaged account can be a lengthy process (and rightly, so that you fully know what you’re signing up to). You can also forget to cancel, which means you can be charged for another month or even more (which I have done before). Obviously you’ll need to check if you’re eligible first whatever the case.

I do do a bit of money movement before a long absence but not for insurance advantages. I try to empty my low- or non-interest bearing accounts into something more rewarding leaving just enough to cover the scheduled debits after allowing for any scheduled credits. It hasn’t gone wrong yet but I sometimes wonder whether it’s worth the time and concentration that it takes. I still leave a cushion in the account to soften any unexpected bouncing. Really lengthy absences are a thing of the past now so the benefits are negligible.

We’ve had an inclusive annual insurance for many years (we don’t pay for it) and we’ve used it only once. When we needed it – one November in Berlin – the company was faultless, reorganising flights (my wife had to be allocated three seats because she’d fractured her patella), organising a private pick-up from the airport (we had to be re-routed to another) and settling the horrendous hospital bills without query. We can’t fault them.

That’s good to hear Ian. Unfortunately that has not been everybody’s experience but it’s impossible to make comparisons because the individual circumstances make a big difference and these are not always fully revealed in people’s reports.

I have travel insurance provided by my American Express Platinum Card. The policy requires me to pay for travel using a UK-issued American Express card. This doesn’t usually cause me a problem, because I prefer to pay with Amex to get my points or airmiles etc. However, this causes problems in the following scenarios:

1. The merchant does not accept American Express.
2. The merchant surcharges for payment by American Express, effectively forcing the customer to use another card such as a debit card.
3. American Express would add a surcharge of 2.99% because the transaction is not denominated in GBP, effectively forcing the customer to use another card that does not levy such a surcharge (which might be a non-UK Amex card).
4. A third party is paying directly for the travel; this is very common when travelling on business.
5. There is no payment for the accommodation, for example when staying in a private home.
6. The travel is paid for with airmiles or points from an airline or hotel loyalty scheme.

The policy waives this requirement only in scenarios 1 and 6, and American Express has informed me in a letter that it would also waive the new condition in scenario 5. But it still leaves open big holes in the cover.

Although it was 4 pages, I’m afraid I found the article really lightweight.
For a start, it misses the value of the benefits when the account is a joint account. My wife died 3 years ago. While she was alive, for a single account fee we had the benefit of AA cover for 2 cars, and worldwide travel cover for us both – an overwhelming bargain.
Since she died, I’ve kept the packaged account because it’s convenient. However, the financial benefits are marginal. I have a couple of pre-existing conditions and the extra annual premium is substantial. I believe I could get equivalent cover elsewhere for a little less but it’s probably not worth shopping around.
You’ve correctly identified that cover stops at 70 or 80, but insurance is still on an annual basis and it’s not impossible for the insurer to effectively decline to insure earlier than those ages through raising the extra premium for existing conditions to an uncompetitive level.
The tables “with medical conditions” suggest that we’re all the same. Much depends on how many conditions and how many medications have been prescribed.

My husband had a cardio version procedure six weeks ago. After the check up he got a letter saying his pulse was strong and regular, his blood pressure excellent, and there is nothing about his heart which should impede his lifestyle. Wonderful, except that insurance companies are still refusing to cover him for heart related issues. What can we do?