Learn from this one

[BAM1748]

Everyone here knows the importance of getting the details right so preaching to the converted I know.

Brit died on holiday in Egypt after hospital 'turned off life support because family couldn't pay £7,000 bill'

 

[n7of9]

that is absolutely SCARY

 

[Pushka]

Everyone here knows the importance of getting the details right so preaching to the converted I know.

Brit died on holiday in Egypt after hospital 'turned off life support because family couldn't pay £7,000 bill'

How dreadful. I’m just wondering why the Insurance company felt that alcohol was the contributing factor and if a blood test was taken, at what level he was for them to decide that. Given they were biking it just doesn’t sound right.

 

[BAM1748]

It could just be incompetence.

A previous job I've had was travelling around the place 'rescuing' Australian nationals from substandard medical treatment, it's everywhere and don't believe your insurance will just take care of it with a man from the Embassy helping you. I've seen a Mexican hospital want to operate open up some ones spine because hey we have the gringo USD to do it with. Lucky for the poor sod I got there first and he had a full recovery here in Australia.

 

[RB]

Seems there are now quite a few newspaper articles. One article I have read mentions the insurance was voided because the patient hadn't declared a stomach infection (peritonitis) suffered 2 yrs previously.

"WHY WAS ADRIAN KING'S INSURANCE VOID?
Adrian King's insurance company told his family his insurance was void because he had failed to declare he had been in hospital in 2015 with peritonitis.

Failure to disclose pre-existing medical conditions can result in the insurer refusing to pay out after a claim.

If a holidaymaker fails to declare any pre-existing condition they are aware of, the insurer will seek to reject any claim on the basis of a breach of condition or warranty."

 

[shellthom]

One of the companies I worked for was to help people while they were trailing overseas. If they were in Oz or returned we left their insurer to deal with it. I had a couple of cases where insurance was going to be declined based on alcohol or just no cover but we (not the insurance company) still guaranteed the payment to the hospital because their life was more important. They may end up with a million dollar debt to us but it would be negotiated to cheapest possible with the hospital and then they would be, or their next of kin, would be put on a payment plan. If the money was never recovered it was never recovered but the insurance companies we worked valued life above all else. I would think this is the same with the UK and there has just been something go wrong with the communication. I cannot imagine being an insurance staff member and sending a message to a hospital that results in their death.
What a complete tragedy, not to ask, just to do it, I can't imagine that. This is why I am afraid of the more budget companies because I don't know who handles their processing while you are travelling. I only take insurance where I know their policy is to guarantee the payment even if you aren't covered.

 

[911tphil]

I had to claim on my travel insurance last year when I suffered a heart attack in the US. I required bypass surgery and you can imagine the hospital bills were significant (around A$400K). I had disclosed my pre-existing condition of Type II diabetes however fhe insurance company then insisted on getting my permission to access ALL my previous medical records from my GP which I assumed was a fishing expedition to see if there was some way they could limit their liability for all the costs involved. There was a significant amount of to and fro by the company contracted by my insurer to investigate and handle the claim and it did take several months before they paid up all the costs. The US hospital continued to send me emails and statements demanding payment as I believe the insurer does attempt to negotiate down the final payment amount. The lesson I learned was to ensure you had properly disclosed any pre-existing condition and also to be well aware of what your own medical records show as they wanted to go back almost 25 years to see if they could argue that even very old conditions had contributed to my problem. It has certainly taught me now to read the fine print on every insurance policy I have.

 

[shellthom]

I had to claim on my travel insurance last year when I suffered a heart attack in the US..

Glad you are ok!

 

[Jack_OC]

What a bizarre and tragic story. The thing that confuses me the most is that it sounds as if the insurance company made a final decision on voiding his insurance within such a short space of time (he seems to have died just 11 days after being admitted). I'm surprised that they would reach such a conclusion so quickly, and even more surprised if undisclosed prior medical history was a factor - I would have assumed it would take longer than that to properly investigate a person's prior history.

Thankfully I don't have any experience of claiming on travel insurance for medical reasons, but I have claimed costs incurred due to cancellations/missed flights, and the process took ages. Same deal with a claim on my home insurance. Obviously there is more urgency with medical situations, but I am genuinely surprised that they would reach a decision so quickly, and I naively assumed that care would be provided if urgently required, with the fees sorted out later.

The "alcohol played a part" issue is also scary. When I'm on holiday, I probably have something alcoholic to drink every day, and I suspect the same is true of many holiday makers. Does that enable insurers to deny any claims that might arise?

 

[911tphil]

I was lucky I was in a "first world" country where communications are excellent. I was asked when entering the Emergency dept about what insurance I had and I did take a copy of my travel insurance policy with me, as I had expected this question. I did, however, feel that I would receive good medical care first and then they would pursue payment later. There was no overt mention of upfront payments or with-holding of care before the money was on the table. It did make me wonder what happens to travellers without insurance in a similar situation.

 

[JohnK]

Very sad story. Hope the family are able to get some answers.

 

[Denali]

..... I did take a copy of my travel insurance policy with me, .....

I actually emailed my husband on Friday a copy of our travel policy, telling him to keep it on his phone/easy access for just in case.

A friends grandmother ended up in hospital in Thailand a couple of years ago and the longer she stayed the worse she seemed to get emotionally but she would only be released if the bill was paid first. She had insurance but until the bill was paid, they werent releasing her, it was a kind of impasse that kept going around and around for days.

A couple of her sons flew to Thailand and after a few days, decided to basically break her out of the hospital and onto her flight (using wheelchair and grandma has mobility issues/is very tired from the heat excuse) and when the flight took off, a small family cheer. After she landed she had a check up with her local doctor, was dehydrated and needed some meds (antibiotics?) but was back to normal by the end of the week.

The bill was eventually paid by insurance but Thailand hospital kept saying she couldnt leave until paid, insurance wouldnt pay until her treatment was complete/she was released.

For the OP, simply horrifying for the family. They have every right to be angry but sadly, I think the story will disappear. Its not right, its unfair. Very sad and it shouldnt have happened.

 

[Must...Fly!]

What a horror. Some lessons in that for sure that I will note. I would be very curious to know the details around claiming alcohol as a factor and how that is determined.

 

[blaz]

No point in bothering with the "fine print" as you can't control the circumstances of an overseas emergency....you will either be covered, or you won't be. Part of the reason that medical bills are huge is simply because they treat the insurance claim as a financial honeypot. Strange how you can travel to a country and organise a procedure that includes flights,hosptals and a week in a hotel for tens of thousands, but if you are caught out in an emergency in the same country, you will be up for many times more. "Pre-existing " conditions can be things that you are unaware of, but may have been noted by your doctor....and if you are old, forget about insurance altogether.

 

[brettd]

I'm a bit surprised a stomach infection from 2 years ago (which I assume would be asymptomatic by now) would be considered a pre-existing condition.

Does this mean if someone broke their wrist as a kid 20 years ago they would be considered as not disclosing pre- existing conditions?

 

[Anna]

In Australia, the Insurance Contracts Act has a section which means that insurers can only refuse a claim on the basis that you've failed to disclose something, if that something is actually relevant to the claim you want to make. Eg a broken wrist 20 years ago would be completely irrelevant to a claim for appendicitis. But a broken wrist 20 years ago might be relevant if the claim was something to do with the same wrist.

The law for UK insurers is very probably different.

 

[Must...Fly!]

I'm a bit surprised a stomach infection from 2 years ago (which I assume would be asymptomatic by now) would be considered a pre-existing condition.

Does this mean if someone broke their wrist as a kid 20 years ago they would be considered as not disclosing pre- existing conditions?

This is something I'm wondering too. At which point is the line drawn? And who is it up to, the insurance company or can you nominate a third party, or if they just make a decision, you have to go along with it until you can challenge it legally?

To give a specific example from me - I suffered glandular fever toward the end of last year, November to be precise. I was back to work in mid-December, and blood tests were fine by mid-January. I just went overseas for a week. Let's say I had an accident - e.g. broken leg. Surely in that circumstance, payment could not be refused per the law?

What about something medically related, let's say a heart attack, or a stroke?

 

[juddles]

As usual with such stories, there is very little in the way of "facts known" with which one could cast any real judgement.

I do think, however, that many people like to forget that the world is a big place, it is not all developed, and bad things do happen.

If I contemplate mountain climbing in Nepal, canoeing the upper reaches of the Amazon, or, as in this case "quad biking in Egypt", I have no expectation that everything will run perfectly.

The alleged story here is that the guy died because a wicked hospital "turned off his life support" because a wicked insurance company refused to pay. Parts of this version may be true, but the very first link in this chain of events was the decision to go thrill-seeking in Egypt.

Insurance is a great thing, but it is not failsafe, just like Life isn't.

 

[Jack_OC]

In Australia, the Insurance Contracts Act has a section which means that insurers can only refuse a claim on the basis that you've failed to disclose something, if that something is actually relevant to the claim you want to make. Eg a broken wrist 20 years ago would be completely irrelevant to a claim for appendicitis. But a broken wrist 20 years ago might be relevant if the claim was something to do with the same wrist.

The law for UK insurers is very probably different.

Are you sure it's that narrow? I was under the impression that they can also refuse a claim (or void your policy) if you failed to disclose something that would have increased your premium. For example with your home insurance - if you fail to disclose that you have been burgled 5 times in the past 5 years, you would get a premium that is much lower than it should be. If you then claim and this failure to disclose comes to light, my understanding is that they can refuse the new claim, even if the new claim relates to something completely different (e.g. if the house burnt down).

It's also very hard to be black and white about what medical history is relevant. Ok, breaking your wrist 20 years ago is not likely to be relevant to sudden death at the age of 37. However, serious infections can lead to long term organ damage, which in turn can increase your risk of all sorts of things. As it happens, my wife was hospitalised with a severe infection 2 years ago, and we recently discovered that a number of life insurance companies won't even provide a quote for cover because of that (even though she has thankfully fully recovered). I believe this is especially the case with the mass-market low cost insurers, as the way they keep their costs down is by only covering very low risk people.

 

[RB]

Perhaps this article is a bit more factual-
Egyptian hospital denies turning off life-support for UK tourist after £7,000 medical bill - Egypt Independent