Hua Hin shark attack victim: Insurance won't pay as wife slams authorities

[webfact]

Hua Hin shark attack victim: Insurance won't pay as wife slams authorities

 

Pictures (2): NewTV

 

The Norwegian shark attack victim in Hua Hin is faced with a 300,000 baht hospital bill after the insurance company refused to pay up.

 

Now his Thai wife has slammed the local authorities who presented him with baskets of goodies but are now refusing to help.

 

Fifty four year old Werner Danielsen was bitten on the left foot on April 15th at Sai Noi beach in an attack that made national news and prompted a swift reaction from the authorities.

 

Many were at his Bangkok Hospital, Hua Hin, bedside having their picture taken after he needed 19 stitches and was hospitalized for after care.

 

 

He had insurance and thought that would take care of everything - he even returned a 5,000 baht payment saying it should be used for other more deserving people. He was not interesting in making money out of it.

 

But the insurance company changed their mind after finding out that Mr Danielsen had been in Thailand more than 3 months, said his wife Amornrat Phaengnga.

 

With costs racking up they moved his care to Sri Nakharin Hospital at Khon Kaen University where they now face further bills running into tens of thousands of baht for follow up treatment and physiotherapy.

 

He has got a two month extension from immigration.

 

Amornrat told NewTV that her husband was given baskets and a big show of help but now he really needs assistance everything has gone quiet.

 

She said she had called the Hua Hin district chief and the mayor and just got brushed off. She believes the authorities should take some responsibility.

 

Mr Danielsen intends to write about what has happened to him as a warning when he goes home to Norway.

 

Deputy governor of Prajuab Khiri Khan province Chotirin Kertsom said he thought that Mr Danielsen had insurance and that the province has no fund for such matters.

 

He said if he ever came back he would give him a "special tourist card".

 

NewTV did not explain what that might entail.

 

Source: NewTV

 

-- © Copyright Thai Visa News 2018-04-30

[darksidedog]

5 minutes ago, webfact said:

But the insurance company changed their mind after finding out that Mr Danielsen had been in Thailand more than 3 months

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.

I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

[hagler]

4 minutes ago, darksidedog said:

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.

I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

He didn't have an effective travel insurance policy that covered him.

 

Therein lies the issue.

 

A lot of policies are "time limited" .

 

His obviously was.

 

Caveat emptor

[tingtongtourist]

another lesson why not to buy into the big scam that is called insurance.

as it says here, typical insurance from home not cover you after 2 or 3 months abroad.

 

sometimes they tell you, sometimes not. doesnt really matter, as for most claims from incidents in Thailand they could find several reasons not to pay anyway

[Tilacme]

25 minutes ago, darksidedog said:

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.

I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

The most i could get travel insurance for was 45 days.

[tracker1]

When he returns to Thailand he will be given a " Special Tourist Card " is that like you are one of the lucky ones to have survived an encounter in Thailand ? because many haven't

[mercman24]

lots of tourists come here on a 30 day travel insurance, then get an extension on their stay, forgetting that the insurance is invalid after that date, just the same as your car insurance realy, you would not expect to drive your car around with no insurance, (talking UK here not Thailand) lol

[scubascuba3]

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.
I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

He bought the wrong insurance, annual insurance rarely covers more than 3 month annual.

Sadly people don't read the small print then moan when they aren't covered

[scubascuba3]

lots of tourists come here on a 30 day travel insurance, then get an extension on their stay, forgetting that the insurance is invalid after that date, just the same as your car insurance realy, you would not expect to drive your car around with no insurance, (talking UK here not Thailand) lol

Yes its worthwhile buying insurance that covers the max you're likely to stay not just the planned. For example i bought 9 months insurance as although i was booked for 8 months an extra month extention was possible.

You can't extend travel insurance once its started

[madmitch]

38 minutes ago, darksidedog said:

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.

I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

Obviously he didn't have an effective travel policy!

 

Travel policies are time-limited. If he originally booked his holiday and paid his insurance premium for, say, 30 days, then he is covered for 30 days; no more. If he has an annual travel policy that states he's covered for a maximum of 90 days per trip then if he stays longer the insurance cover is void.

 

I can assure you that the vast majority of valid claims in accordance with the terms and conditions of a travel insurance policy are paid with no hassle. But break the terms and conditions and you are not covered. 

 

PR opportunity? Maybe, but does an insurance really want to set a precedent in paying out uninsured claims? 

 

[midas]

52 minutes ago, hagler said:

He didn't have an effective travel insurance policy that covered him.

 

Therein lies the issue.

 

A lot of policies are "time limited" .

 

His obviously was.

 

Caveat emptor

" Caveat emptor "

 

Yes indeed! Particularly when it comes to insurance companies

[NCC1701A]

" Mr Danielsen intends to write about what has happened to him as a warning when he goes home to Norway."

 

a warning of what not to do?

 

 

[MrJohnson]

Read the fine print.

[Coaster11]

He may have Travel Insurance that is offered free by a lot of Credit Cards these days,

 

No application is needed and you only have to have some of the cost of the holiday used by said CC to be covered. Usually a bill of over $250 for flights,hotels or hire car etc to get it.

 

Not sure of the T&C's but 3 months or more may not be classed as a holiday by the CC company.

[janclaes47]

1 hour ago, darksidedog said:

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.

I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

 

Most travel insurance have a limit of 90 days written in their policy.

 

I found many years ago one that didn't have that limit, so I thought I was save, but when I had an issue they didn't pay.

 

At that point they claimed that in the policy was written that the insurance was available to residents of my country only, but since I was more than 180 days absent from my country, I was not a resident any more.

 

I checked this with my government, and it was confirmed.

[sweatalot]

1 hour ago, darksidedog said:

If he had an effective travel insurance policy that gave him cover at the time of the incident, that should not matter.

I dont know who comes off looking worse here, the insurance company for wriggling out of paying or the Hua Hin politicians who were very keen to get a photo with him, but now seem to be washing their hands of it, as it might involve lobbing out some cash. They are both missing a big PR opportunity.

most travel insurance ae valid only for the first 45 days of the travel. It is clearly written in the contracts.

He should have read his - no need to blame the insurance

[nausea]

Ha. Ha. Ha.

[worgeordie]

Even if he had insurance ,I suspect the Insurance company would

have found a way to wriggle out of responsibility, Shark attack =

Act of God.

regards worgeordie

[scubascuba3]

This 180 day clause is always in the small print. Insurers will just check the passport when someone tries to claim. I stayed in the UK 181 days

 
Most travel insurance have a limit of 90 days written in their policy.
 
I found many years ago one that didn't have that limit, so I thought I was save, but when I had an issue they didn't pay.
 
At that point they claimed that in the policy was written that the insurance was available to residents of my country only, but since I was more than 180 days absent from my country, I was not a resident any more.
 
I checked this with my government, and it was confirmed.

[janclaes47]

Just now, scubascuba3 said:

This 180 day clause is always in the small print. Insurers will just check the passport when someone tries to claim. I stayed in the UK 181 days

 

In my contract was not written anything about the 180 days, unless you mean the " resident " clause, and then you are correct.

 

By the way, they never saw my passport, so I'm still curious how they knew I wasn't there for more than 180 days. I was registered at a property I owned.

[chuang]

Staying  in Bangkok Hospital is expensive, i think most people know that....

[stevenl]

27 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

Even if he had insurance ,I suspect the Insurance company would

have found a way to wriggle out of responsibility, Shark attack =

Act of God.

regards worgeordie

Nonsense.

[scubascuba3]

 

In my contract was not written anything about the 180 days, unless you mean the " resident " clause, and then you are correct.

 

By the way, they never saw my passport, so I'm still curious how they knew I wasn't there for more than 180 days. I was registered at a property I owned.

Some policy docs specify 180 days resident, and confusing variations of that, some say UK resident (same as 180 days). I'm not sure how they would know without seeing the passport. Maybe seeing flight confirm. Or they just bluffed it to see how you reacted

 

[worgeordie]

26 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Nonsense.

So in  a normal insurance policy,what would a shark attack come under ?

regards worgeordie 

[mommysboy]

Bitten twice.

 

When he gets presented with the final bill, he'll probably wish he was back in with the shark.

[Gas666]

2 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Yes its worthwhile buying insurance that covers the max you're likely to stay not just the planned. For example i bought 9 months insurance as although i was booked for 8 months an extra month extention was possible.

You can't extend travel insurance once its started

Yes you can. I have done it before. I just emailed my insurer and they gave me an extension and a fee for the extra period.

It's not really in the small print either with how long you are covered on yearly or Cc insurance.Up to you to have a look at policy. Sick of reading about morons not covered like this or on motorbikes then start complaining about the companies.

[Tilacme]

2 hours ago, worgeordie said:

Even if he had insurance ,I suspect the Insurance company would

have found a way to wriggle out of responsibility, Shark attack =

Act of God.

regards worgeordie

God is a shark! I thought God was Mr Stephens, head of catering.

[sammieuk1]

Getting bitten by an uninsured shark is very common here.

[Blue Muton]

The shark bit him on the foot then his carelessness bit him in the wallet.

 

look out, here comes the Gofundme!

[worgeordie]

13 minutes ago, Tilacme said:

God is a shark! I thought God was Mr Stephens, head of catering.

Yes, in some Polynesian countries they are worshiped as Gods,

did you not know that ..

regards Worgeordie