I can get urgent surgery done in Thailand within 1 week but the insurance company wants to repatriate me to Australia and then of course I would be put onto a public hospital waiting list for many months.

 

Has anybody had experience with a similar situation?

I assume this is travel insurance.  Under the terms of all the travel policies I have seen, the insurance company has the right to insist on repatriation if the patient's condition is sufficiently stable to travel and the needed care does not have to be given immediately on the spot.  This is one of the things that makes travel insurance so affordable.

 

In practice companies will often agree to pay for treatment abroad IF  it is going to cost the same or less than repatriating the person. In your case obviously they have made the calculation that repatriation is cheaper and you are stable enough to fly.

 

Unless you are too ill to safely fly (would need medical certification to that effect) you have no recourse, you have to either let them fly you back to Oz or pay for the surgery yourself in Thailand.

 

If it is truly "urgent", as in life or death, I doubt the wait would be that long in Oz. It is elective procedures that have very long waits.

Thank you Sheryl and yes it is travel insurance.

 

I am hoping someone will reply that has actual personal experience.

 

My insurance policy states "...we reserve the right to repatriate...". It does not say "...we will always repatriate..." and that is a big difference.

"...we reserve the right to repatriate..." means someone needs to make a decision and that person needs to see the big picture as to how it will affect the policyholder and how it will affect the insurance company.

 

This means there is much room for negotiation and it is certainly not a clear cut outcome regardless of how the insurance company would have you believe.

 

Does anyone have personal experience in this matter?

will they pay for air fares?

14 hours ago, ThomasAJ said:

Thank you Sheryl and yes it is travel insurance.

 

I am hoping someone will reply that has actual personal experience.

 

My insurance policy states "...we reserve the right to repatriate...". It does not say "...we will always repatriate..." and that is a big difference.

"...we reserve the right to repatriate..." means someone needs to make a decision and that person needs to see the big picture as to how it will affect the policyholder and how it will affect the insurance company.

 

This means there is much room for negotiation and it is certainly not a clear cut outcome regardless of how the insurance company would have you believe.

 

Does anyone have personal experience in this matter?

I have been involved in many such cases.

 

"reserves the right" means they get to decide. It is not  a negotiation.

 

In a situation where the needed care can be given in the country of travel, the factors are as I stated:

- whether the care needs to be provided instantly or could wait at least a few days

-whether the patient is medically stable enough to safely fly

-whether the costs of repatriation are significantly less than the cost of treatment in the country where the patient is traveling

 

That's it.  The only things you can do that might influence matters would be to  either prove you are too medically unstable to fly, or establish that the cost of treatment in Thailand will be less than the cost of repatriation.

 

I would tread a bit lightly if I were you as pushing the matter on grounds that you will face a wait list in Australia may raise suspicion that you knew you needed this procedure before you took the trip/took out the insurance which would mean it was pre-existing. 

 

 

 

 

13 hours ago, strai8 said:

will they pay for air fares?

When travel insurance repatriates someone for medical reasons they pay the travel costs, whatever these are. This may even include a medical attendant on the flight etc. and will often mean business class travel. Sometimes they have to pay to remove whole row of seats to accommodate a stretcher. But does nto sound like the OP is in a condition that would require such measures since he is so certain the surgery would not take place for months in Australia.