Phuket hospital hits back over UK claims they put money first after tourist's motorbike accident

[scorecard]

2 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I agree with you about the mother, and you are correct, the first 72 hours is supposed to be free anywhere.

Two accidents in 3 weeks is very bad luck, though this one can't be blamed on him, regardless of how the first one happened.

My point however was that a bike is the sole means of transport for a vast number of the population. Whether a local or a tourist. this is how people get around here.

The travel insurance was for a trip to Thailand and the insurance company must have been aware of this.

The situation in the UK is obviously very different and most people have  a car.

Where I live, I can find a motor bike taxi easy enough, but an actual taxi is not likely. And I like many others try not to use the taxis anyway, as I don't like bad manners, bad driving and being overcharged.

 

Quote:  "...the first 72 hours is supposed to be free anywhere..."

 

From my understand it's not that simple.

 

My understanding is that If the nearest hospital to an accident (or any medical emergency) is an expensive one then that hospital is required to give free treatment for three days if the patients condition is life threatening. 

 

If the patients injuries are superficial and non life threatening the hospital is within it's rights to tell the patient they should go to another hospital .

[The Deerhunter]

3 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I agree with you about the mother, and you are correct, the first 72 hours is supposed to be free anywhere.

Two accidents in 3 weeks is very bad luck, though this one can't be blamed on him, regardless of how the first one happened.

My point however was that a bike is the sole means of transport for a vast number of the population. Whether a local or a tourist. this is how people get around here.

The travel insurance was for a trip to Thailand and the insurance company must have been aware of this.

The situation in the UK is obviously very different and most people have  a car.

Where I live, I can find a motor bike taxi easy enough, but an actual taxi is not likely. And I like many others try not to use the taxis anyway, as I don't like bad manners, bad driving and being overcharged.

Where I live I might have to travel 50km or probably more to reach a town where any taxi has 4 wheels, unless you include mini busses.

[prakhonchai nick]

Insure&Go are not the Insurers per se. They deal with Underwriters I believe it is the Underwriter who should make the decision as to whether he is insured or not,

Jake Tobin -or his Mother should contact the Underwriter direct for more information

 

About our underwriter

Our travel insurance is provided and underwritten by MAPFRE ASISTENCIA COMPAÑÍA INTERNACIONAL DE SEGUROS Y REASEGUROS, S.A. (or MAPFRE ASISTENCIA for short).

MAPFRE ASISTENCIA is a multinational insurance and assistance company in Madrid, Spain. They have worldwide operations in Europe, America, Asia and Africa with over 161 million beneficiaries worldwide. In 2011 and 2013, MAPFRE ASISTENCIA was awarded Insurer/Underwriter of the Year at the ITIJ Awards.

Regulated by

MAPFRE ASISTENCIA is authorised by the Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones and is subject to limited regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority* (firm registration number 203041), with a branch registered in England and Wales with company name MAPFRE ASSISTANCE (company number FC021974, branch number BR008042). Their registered office in the UK is at 5th Floor, Alpha House, 24A Lime Street, London EC3M 7HS.

 

[bbbbooboo]

hmmm..... I suspect this might be a situation where the more they deny it, the more likely it is to be true.....TIT for sure

[HooHaa]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

There's a first.

 

I agree with the insurance company. 

 

i believe he was actually quite lucky the first time - many travel insurance policies quite clearly state that motorcycle s are out.

 

im surprised they paid anything at all.

 

 

[Mises]

His mother needs to take this up with the insurance ombudsman and/or a solicitor (preferably no win no fee). I am not at all convinced riding pillion on a scooter with a broken arm is reckless. Furthermore it is almost certain that the broken arm did not in anyway contribute to the second accident and hence it is irrelevant to the claim.

The insurance contract was made in England and therefore subject to English law, I very much doubt that the insurance company's position will stand up in an English court.

 

[HooHaa]

8 minutes ago, prakhonchai nick said:

Insure&Go are not the Insurers per se. They deal with Underwriters I believe it is the Underwriter who should make the decision as to whether he is insured or not,

Jake Tobin -or his Mother should contact the Underwriter direct for more information

 

About our underwriter

Our travel insurance is provided and underwritten by MAPFRE ASISTENCIA COMPAÑÍA INTERNACIONAL DE SEGUROS Y REASEGUROS, S.A. (or MAPFRE ASISTENCIA for short).

MAPFRE ASISTENCIA is a multinational insurance and assistance company in Madrid, Spain. They have worldwide operations in Europe, America, Asia and Africa with over 161 million beneficiaries worldwide. In 2011 and 2013, MAPFRE ASISTENCIA was awarded Insurer/Underwriter of the Year at the ITIJ Awards.

Regulated by

MAPFRE ASISTENCIA is authorised by the Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones and is subject to limited regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority* (firm registration number 203041), with a branch registered in England and Wales with company name MAPFRE ASSISTANCE (company number FC021974, branch number BR008042). Their registered office in the UK is at 5th Floor, Alpha House, 24A Lime Street, London EC3M 7HS.

 

most insurers deal with underwriters, and many will reject claims to protect their master policy.

[albro]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

There's a first.

 

I agree with the insurance company. 

Agreed. I feel bad for him and wouldn't wish an injury on anyone, but anyone who hops on the back of a motorcycle in Thailand with one arm in a sling is taking a self-evidently high risk, and should not be surprised when the insurance company calls them out on it. Poor luck, mate, but don't ask other insurees to pay for it.

[HooHaa]

11 minutes ago, The Deerhunter said:

Where I live I might have to travel 50km or probably more to reach a town where any taxi has 4 wheels, unless you include mini busses.

excellent information , how is it relevant to a motorcycle accident in phuket?

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Quote:  "...the first 72 hours is supposed to be free anywhere..."

 

From my understand it's not that simple.

 

My understanding is that If the nearest hospital to an accident (or any medical emergency) is an expensive one then that hospital is required to give free treatment for three days if the patients condition is life threatening. 

 

If the patients injuries are superficial and non life threatening the hospital is within it's rights to tell the patient they should go to another hospital .

"My understanding is that If the nearest hospital to an accident (or any medical emergency) is an expensive one then that hospital is required to give free treatment for three days if the patients condition is life threatening. "

Proved the patient is Thai. This free emergency treatment does not extend to foreigners.

[merijn]

I love riding big bikes and had several in the past (HD and Goldwing) but is just to dangerous on the Thai roads.

You can drive safely yourself but there are to many nut cases on the road who make it to dangerous for the rest.

Also the quality of the roads (open potholes etc) makes it dangerous to drive here in my opinion.

Therefore i only drive cars even i miss riding bikes.

Most of the people i know who rides bikes had at least one or more accidents in the past.

 

[phetpeter]

Firstly if the bike here was on was a hire bike then it comes with third party by law and the same goes for owner of the bike. This covers a chunk of hospital payments. If the driver of the bike has no insurance cover then he should sue him. Second if proved they were hit by a van and can i.d then his insurance should cover all expenses if proved at fault.

[HooHaa]

15 minutes ago, Mises said:

His mother needs to take this up with the insurance ombudsman and/or a solicitor (preferably no win no fee). I am not at all convinced riding pillion on a scooter with a broken arm is reckless. Furthermore it is almost certain that the broken arm did not in anyway contribute to the second accident and hence it is irrelevant to the claim.

The insurance contract was made in England and therefore subject to English law, I very much doubt that the insurance company's position will stand up in an English court.

 

yes that would be intereting to see. 

we dont know if he had a helmet on, whether the bike was a private one or an uninsured taxi, the sobriety of the driver etc.

 

under english law its likely he was breaking many more rules than he had broken here.

 

and we still haven't seen his policy or the terms, so i suspect you have very little idea of what you speak.

[gamini]

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

That 'free emergency treatment' does not cover foreigners.

you are wrong. as a permanent resident many years ago I got the free emergency treatment "id"  and I still have it.

[Mises]

3 minutes ago, HooHaa said:

 

i believe he was actually quite lucky the first time - many travel insurance policies quite clearly state that motorcycle s are out.

 

im surprised they paid anything at all.

 

 

Correct, and the small print gets more exclusive every year. My own insurance only covers motorbikes where the driver has a full licence in his/her home country for the bike being used and in my experience this is the only cover now available. They used to say you only needed a motorbike licence for bikes over 150cc but clearly this was costing the insurance companies too much. Hence most UK tourists who hire scooters in Thailand are not now insured.

I also had a big argument with them this year because they had now excluded "mountain biking". What they are trying to exclude is people coming down mountains in, say, the alps but to me the wording excluded me riding my mountain bike anywhere. I did get the necessary written assurances so my advice to everyone is read all the small print and get it clarified where necessary.

[phetpeter]

Whatever he is improving..time to move him to a government hospital, to lower costs, and a VIP room at government hospital is a lot cheaper than where he is now. Save trying to milk the go fund me network for more money than is required. allow the funds to be donated to others in need.

[natway09]

Very good point Old Croc.

I am in your position, pay, pay ,pay premiums that have never claimed on as have been both lucky health wise

& cautious when driving on these mad roads her (over 1mil Km ) & never had to make a claim ...... touch wood

[HooHaa]

13 minutes ago, gamini said:

you are wrong. as a permanent resident many years ago I got the free emergency treatment "id"  and I still have it.

that is a silly remark. 

 

PR is radically different than a tourist visa or exemption - PR comes with many benefits, something you are likely aware of if you have been through the onerous process of attaining it.

 

[stevenl]

11 minutes ago, gamini said:

you are wrong. as a permanent resident many years ago I got the free emergency treatment "id"  and I still have it.

Your ID has nothing to do with the new 'free 72 hour emergency treatment'.

 

You may be, inadvertently,  correct in that this new rule also applies to permanent residents, I don't know.

[daveAustin]

3 hours ago, steven100 said:

Try and get treated in the US or the UK after an accident ......

of course they want to confirm how the treatment is going to be paid ..... they are a business not a charity.

The UK will treat EVERYONE in an emergency, no question... questions only come later for non-British subjects with regards payment. This is the way of a civilised society, though obviously foreigners take the piss.

 

But the op title is just face-saving hot air. Everyone knows how it is in Thailand regards money and hospitals; they are businesses first and foremost.

The insurance firm sounds like a Mickey Mouse outfit that is disregarding local reports of the bike being rear-ended and thus self-justifying non-payment. His family and friends will likely spread the word on social media and it will cost them more than the million baht treatment. Not a given by any stretch as insurers can be cheating scum, but best to stick with the big guys, folks.

[phetpeter]

25,000 pounds for his accident and he's only been in hospital for about a week! So he got a bang on the head and a broken leg, recovering well, sure the hospital will ramp up their fees, but not 25,000 pounds worth. 

[JaseTheBass]

4 hours ago, retell said:

should this not be on the insurance of the dricer of the van????

No. He was Thai, so exempt from responsibility.

[madmitch]

The relevant part of the policy wording states as follows:

 

Reckless or malicious acts

We will not pay for any claim arising or resulting from you being involved in any malicious, reckless, illegal or criminal act. 

 

A definition of a reckless act is open to interpretation and, provided the victim was wearing a helmet (riding without a helmet is definitely excluded under this particular policy) I think he would have a chance of a without prejudice partial settlement from the insurance company if he and his family file a complaint with the insurance ombudsman's office. 

 

 

[LivinginKata]

Just now, JaseTheBass said:

No. He was Thai, so exempt from responsibility.

 

That's not strickly true, if this driver was caught by police (I understand he drove away and has not been caught ?) then the police would negotiate compensation if the driver did not have first class insurance, to save the driver going to jail.

[Jeremy50]

It would be interesting to see a break-down of the cost. 1Mill? What made it so expensive? Those doctors must be very well paid, or drugs very expensive. Does the hippocratic oath apply over here?  I see never getting on a motorbike for any reason whatsoever in Thailand as a form of personal health insurance.

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, LivinginKata said:

 

That's not strickly true, if this driver was caught by police (I understand he drove away and has not been caught ?) then the police would negotiate compensation if the driver did not have first class insurance, to save the driver going to jail.

Even stronger, if it is a commercial van (very likely) it will have insurance.

[JaseTheBass]

8 minutes ago, LivinginKata said:

 

That's not strickly true, if this driver was caught by police (I understand he drove away and has not been caught ?) then the police would negotiate compensation if the driver did not have first class insurance, to save the driver going to jail.

That's if the police can be bothered doing their job.

[stevenl]

18 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

The UK will treat EVERYONE in an emergency, no question... questions only come later for non-British subjects with regards payment. This is the way of a civilised society, though obviously foreigners take the piss.

 

But the op title is just face-saving hot air. Everyone knows how it is in Thailand regards money and hospitals; they are businesses first and foremost.

The insurance firm sounds like a Mickey Mouse outfit that is disregarding local reports of the bike being rear-ended and thus self-justifying non-payment. His family and friends will likely spread the word on social media and it will cost them more than the million baht treatment. Not a given by any stretch as insurers can be cheating scum, but best to stick with the big guys, folks.

"But the op title is just face-saving hot air. Everyone knows how it is in Thailand regards money and hospitals; they are businesses first and foremost."

 

So how do you explain the victim here receiving treatment without insurance cover or any payment guarantee.

[thaiguzzi]

2 hours ago, KittenKong said:

 

To my mind even sitting on a stationary motorbike in Thailand is reckless. These things are hideously dangerous as this chap has discovered (twice).

 

I've not been on a motorbike anywhere for more than 40 years and have intention of ever doing so.

Don't forget to put on your bright yellow fluro jacket when you close the house door on the way out... it's dangerous out there...

[dcsw53]

He paid his policy and the insurance company entered into an agreement to cover him. He then had an accident where he had to claim. After that accident the insurance company should have told him that any further claims would be refused. Whether they considered him reckless or not ( he was not driving just a passenger so this is higly debatable ) they still had a contract with him and as such should pay the claim.