A ray of hope for Aussie mum in a coma after life-threatening tumble in Thailand (video)

[Liverpool Lou]

10 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Unless the policy specified the traveler could not drink alcohol while insured

Policies do not state that the insured cannot any drink any alcohol, they have exclusions for being drunk and that contributing to the accident, in this case she was, apparently, "heavily intoxicated".

[Liverpool Lou]

8 hours ago, The Fugitive said:

I guess the yardstick should be; 'Would a reasonable person have fallen in that way if they hadn't been intoxicated?' 

Perhaps the yardstick should be, "Would a reasonable person have fallen in that way if they hadn't been as heavily intoxicated as she was?"

[Liverpool Lou]

8 hours ago, BritManToo said:

And there appears to be no evidence that she was drunk.

Falling off a non-existent step is something anyone could do

Well, you haven't been provided with any evidence that she was drunk (but then you're not a party in this case). The insurer claims that she was heavily intoxicated.  Falling off the deck was something that this woman did, drunk, whether anyone else would do the same is irrelevant.

[Liverpool Lou]

5 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Having a few drinks and walking around are absolutely the most basic of normal holiday activities.

Is getting "heavily intoxicated" absolutely the most basic of normal holiday activities?

[Liverpool Lou]

5 hours ago, arick said:

The insurance companies can say anything have you read the clauses they can turn around and say that she was doing something dangerous and she shouldn't have been one meter high on a balcony with no railing anyway she should be okay it's just a blunt head injury to the skull at least she wasn't in the motorcycle accident

B0ll0cks, she was pissed, heavily intoxicated, that's the relevant part and the reason that her policy was voided.

Edited June 21, 2023 by Liverpool Lou

[Liverpool Lou]

1 hour ago, Pouatchee said:

where does it say she was drunk?

the full report says she had consumed alcohol...

The full report says that the insurer stated that she was "heavily intoxicated".

[ubonr1971]

14 hours ago, AhFarangJa said:

COVERMORE INSURANCE......mentioned in the video................can we spread it around or is that against Forum rules, Apologies if it is.

In late 2000 I put a claim in at a private hospital for usd60k and they paid it. Looks like they have changed their tune. Used to be a good insurance company....

[ubonr1971]

6 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I think she is hideously unlucky that she had a bad accident in these circumstances however if she was heavily intoxicated, as against a few drinks, the insurance company has a point. Covermore actually has a good reputation in Australia and I have personal experience of a friend having a claim in Thailand as it happens and they were nothing but helpful and paid up. 

They paid up for me 10 yrs ago or more. USD60k included private medivac plane. 

[Pouatchee]

11 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

The full report says that the insurer stated that she was "heavily intoxicated".

i must have missed that. i never go read the full story link but this time i did... and did not see she was heavily intoxicated. i dont know how i feel about this update. i had issues with bluecross or whatever they are named now over 500bht, so i have trouble cheering for the insurers. from your post liverpool lou, you seem totally for insurance companies and i dont get why. was she heavily intoxicated or not i dont know and how did they figure that? insurers can turn around and decide that even if someone is not over the legal limit that they wont pay and it becomes the insurees burden to prove they were not, which is impossible. @Liverpool Loui am one of the few who keeps defending house insurance. i guess until i have an issue with it i will remain kind of on the fence. 

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

43 minutes ago, Pouatchee said:

i never go read the full story link but this time i did... and did not see she was heavily intoxicated

"...did not see she was heavily intoxicated".

Watch the video!   You'll see it there.

[FritsSikkink]

21 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I would say yes, as it's normal behaviour when on holiday.

And there appears to be no evidence that she was drunk.

Falling off a non-existent step is something anyone could do (drunk or not).

They admitted drinking 10 long Island Ice teas. She will be drunk after a few of those.

[Liverpool Lou]

45 minutes ago, Pouatchee said:

from your post liverpool lou, you seem totally for insurance companies and i dont get why.

I have no reason to be against insurance companies which, overall, pay out in excess of 90% of all claims (there are industry statistics that are easily found that confirm that), but I am 100% against unsubstantiated claims from AN posters who, without any rational reason or empirical evidence, slag off the insurers in general (and specifically, in this case) by referring to them as "scumbags who do anything they can to deny claims" just because they do not entertain claims for circumstances that are not covered in the policy the customer signed up for.  Maybe someone could explain to me why they should?

[PremiumLane]

18 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

Its was the person I qouted that reckons the insurance company should be named and shamed for upholding the terms and conditions of their policy.

 

Go have a cry to him.

There seems to be only one person crying in this topic - "Won't someone think of the poor insurance companies!"  

[arick]

13 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

B0ll0cks, she was pissed, heavily intoxicated, that's the relevant part and the reason that her policy was voided.

I think maybe you're intoxicated because you don't understand what I'm saying I'm stating clearly on the terms of any travel insurance your policy can be deleted for any reason

[arick]

27 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I have no reason to be against insurance companies which, overall, pay out in excess of 90% of all claims (there are industry statistics that are easily found that confirm that), but I am 100% against unsubstantiated claims from AN posters who, without any rational reason or empirical evidence, slag off the insurers in general (and specifically, in this case) by referring to them as "scumbags who do anything they can to deny claims" just because they do not entertain claims for circumstances that are not covered in the policy the customer signed up for.  Maybe someone could explain to me why they should?

Exactly if you take time and look at the 10 page terms and a conditions of any travel insurance they can exclude you and delete you for any bloody reason you don't need to be intoxicated you can be in a dangerous position one foot above the ground and they can say that that's a dangerous condition so these other people that slag me off saying I'm talking b******* and they need they haven't grown up yet

[bignok]

https://www.insuremytrip.com/travel-insurance-plans-coverages/alcohol-exclusions-and-your-travel-insurance-plan/#:~:text=Does Travel Insurance Cover Alcohol,a part in the incident.

 

Be careful drinking

[bignok]

34 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I have no reason to be against insurance companies which, overall, pay out in excess of 90% of all claims (there are industry statistics that are easily found that confirm that), but I am 100% against unsubstantiated claims from AN posters who, without any rational reason or empirical evidence, slag off the insurers in general (and specifically, in this case) by referring to them as "scumbags who do anything they can to deny claims" just because they do not entertain claims for circumstances that are not covered in the policy the customer signed up for.  Maybe someone could explain to me why they should?

You are right. 

[Liverpool Lou]

19 minutes ago, arick said:

Exactly if you take time and look at the 10 page terms and a conditions of any travel insurance they can exclude you and delete you for any bloody reason you don't need to be intoxicated you can be in a dangerous position one foot above the ground and they can say that that's a dangerous condition

B0ll0cks...unless you've got something empirical showing that to be the case.   

Insurers cannot "exclude you and delete you for any bloody reason" [sic] once the policy (contract) is signed and in force unless those reasons are included in the policy conditions or unless the policy holder has contravened any other conditions.   

 

The bottom line is, if you don't like the bloody (to use your word) policy conditions, don't buy the bloody policy.

Edited June 22, 2023 by Liverpool Lou

[digger70]

14 hours ago, The Fugitive said:

That's interesting thank you. I know that in the UK there is a shared insurer's database. Presumably, same would apply in Australia?  

I don't know if that is ,I had no problem insuring the new car with an other insurer.

No questions asked.

[Ralf001]

43 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

There seems to be only one person crying in this topic - "Won't someone think of the poor insurance companies!"  

Crying by those who think the insurance companies should ignore their terms and conditions the customer agreed to and if they do not they should be named and shamed.

[KhunLA]

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I have no reason to be against insurance companies which, overall, pay out in excess of 90% of all claims

My experience has been completely different (not travel ins, never had), but homeowner's & health ins. (private health, workman's comp & SS) I had to sue, more than of few times (& won) before receiving rightfully deserved payment.

 

Auto ins. being the only one paying promptly when claim submitted.   Had to sue every other (1 homeowner claim was honored) for claims submitted, for home & health coverage they refused to pay.

Edited June 22, 2023 by KhunLA

[Liverpool Lou]

14 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

My experience has been completely different (not travel ins, never had), but homeowner's & health ins. (private health, workman's comp & SS) I had to sue, more than of few times (& won) before receiving rightfully deserved payment.

 

Auto ins. being the only one paying promptly when claim submitted.   Had to sue every other (1 homeowner claim was honored) for claims submitted, for home & health coverage they refused to pay.

You'd, unfortunately, be one of the tiny 10% or less minority that is not representative of the industry , in general, then.

Edited June 22, 2023 by Liverpool Lou

[KhunLA]

10 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

You'd, unfortunately, be one of the tiny 10% or less minority that is not representative of the industry , in general, then.

My fellow co-workers, peers & friends all seemed to have had the same problem.  I guess we are the total of that 10%.

 

Our experiences ... YMMV

[tigerfeet]

On 6/21/2023 at 12:23 AM, hotchilli said:

Name and shame the insurance company.

Once they are publicly known I hope they lose thousands of customers.

Unfortunately they won't loose out as they will just move on the people who loose are the  employed as they loose jobs and the rest of us pay more for insurance.its a no win world for the sheep .

[arick]

14 hours ago, bignok said:

You are right. 

Sounds like you work for Lloyd's in London

[jacko45k]

On 6/21/2023 at 12:10 PM, Neeranam said:

Should insurance companies pay for people who do something when drunk?

 

Should insurance companies be taking premiums and expecting people not to drink when on vacations? If sleeping it off and the hotel ceiling collapses on me, I would hope to be covered. 

[itsari]

On 6/21/2023 at 2:22 PM, WHansen said:

Brutal

More racist I would say 

[itsari]

30 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Should insurance companies be taking premiums and expecting people not to drink when on vacations? If sleeping it off and the hotel ceiling collapses on me, I would hope to be covered. 

Covered in dust at least 

[Neeranam]

2 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Should insurance companies be taking premiums and expecting people not to drink when on vacations? If sleeping it off and the hotel ceiling collapses on me, I would hope to be covered. 

What if an alcoholic drives/crashes a car when not drinking as he has DTs?

Obviously they can't check everyone's mental state.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Neeranam

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, Neeranam said:

What if an alcoholic drives/crashes a car when not drinking as he has DTs?

Probably covered in weasel clause 13b.