Diving accident: British backpacker is stuck in a hospital in Thailand unless she raises £60,000 to fly home

[Lenny Jones]

Quote from their OWN SITE ! ( a review):

After months of delays dealing with a…

After months of delays dealing with a claim for about £700, they sent me £30 and quoted one of almost 200 exclusion clauses as to why they wouldn't pay the rest. Sued them at Money Claims On Line and won with costs, on the grounds that the clause was unreasonable. Don't let them direct you to Financial Ombudsmen as it could take up to two years. County Court by far the better option.

[Surasak]

Insure and go? More like Flog it anf Leg it would be a more suitable name.

[evadgib]

5 hours ago, Lungstib said:

Diving into a swimming pool now considered reckless? The insurance company needs to be suitably shamed and harassed.

Methinks the 'pool' was as per the photos in the OP.

[Bryan Digby]

4 hours ago, BestB said:

I do not know if her family is aware or which company or is , but she or her family can file a complaint with the ombudsman against insurance company and may well win . They can also take insurance company to court. 

Insurance Companies are in business to make money for their shareholders and directors by any means possible.

Enough said. ( 50 years + in the Insurance Business)

[kiwikeith]

4 hours ago, Jeremy50 said:

The insurance company are scum basically. The Thai hospital will be cashing in no doubt. I guess crowdfunding is the only option, not many people in Britain have that kind of money at the moment. I hope she recovers. 

Getting paid by insurance companies these days is hard.

The companies in NZ do not want to pay for claims they can avoid with excuses.

You have to be careful what you say when claiming.

In this case I think the family should take this to the government of Britain and make some noise about this as it seems stupid that they call this reckless behaviour , it is a accident.

[IAMHERE]

The swimming pool at my current condo and the 2 condo's before this one ALL had signs saying 'No Diving'. I'd expect the one she jumped head first into also had signs of that nature. That is what makes it a reckless act.

[falang1969]

Reading the linked article, accident happened in Pai, was transferred to Chiang Mai. Current bill at Chiang Mai Ram is GBP37k (BHT1.5m) and the cost of flying her home with full medical assistance is GBP23k.

 

"Insure and Go" should be responsible! Get this story onto the UK BBC "Watchdog" TV programme and it'll be sorted immediately!

 

 

[bristolgeoff]

the begging bowl is out again what a surprise,once again please help me pay my bills for cm ram

[SunsetT]

Are there scuba diving courses in Pai???

 

You cannot get much further away from the sea!

[Billy Bloggs]

I feel sorry for the young lady I took the reckless path a lot in my younger days(unlike a lot here who spent their time in cotton wool) and thankfully got through, I dont see her act as reckless, she could have been caught by the depth change where she went in, while others close by were fine, one thing and dont know how many pools are like this here, but our local pool has the deep bit in the middle both ends are shallow, bloody surprised me first time when I got a bit tuckered and went to stand.

[Krataiboy]

5 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Are there any companies offering travel insurance which includes diving in their regular package?  I have never seen it not listed as an exception that is not covered, its just too dangerous, the fact that it happened in a pool will not make any difference to them, had she not been training to dive it would have done, but with scuba gear on they wont pay, standard practice, so no need to name as its all of them.

What makes you think she dived in wearing scuba gear?

[BestB]

50 minutes ago, Bryan Digby said:

Insurance Companies are in business to make money for their shareholders and directors by any means possible.

Enough said. ( 50 years + in the Insurance Business)

What you fail to understand is that it’s not only her medical bills now but her entire future . It’s not 60000 pounds but in the millions .

 

of course they try to deny to avoid having to pay out . If you accept , they win.

 

if you do not accept anc take further action , very likely you will win. And that’s not speaking from 50 years of whatever but having personal experience with a claim being denied initially ????

[Ulic]

Of course this is ridiculous. But this is what makes travel insurance companies billions. They don't pay claims. Many are like this. Small print exclusions, and in "their judgment". This story needs to be featured in the travel section of UK papers and wherever this company sells insurance. 

[Austrian26]

my friend (teacher) played football with a bunch of 5 year old children after school. it was wet a bit and he slipped, he injured his arm and had to pay 100k baht himself , allthough he was insured, because the insurance company deemed playing football as a pofessional and high risk sport. 

Insurance companys always will find a way out if they can. You are basically only protected from sickness or accidents that are 100% not your fault, otherwise you payed them for nothing. 

[geriatrickid]

It appears that there are a great many people who would rather post  accusations and claims of wrongdoing instead of considering the facts of the case.  Doesn't anyone think?

 

Where does it say that the insurance company denied payment because of an accident at a swimming pool? WHERE?

All that we have is a statement from the woman alleging that the claim was denied on the basis of her diving into the pool. Who here knows for a fact that her statement is truthful and that these are the actual circumstances of the event?

How many of you know what type of coverage the person had?  I would not be wrong if I said none of you know.

How many of you have even bothered to read the policy the woman  most likely had? Again, I will say none of you.

 

I will help you out;

The insurer is a large Spanish multinational. It offers low end travel insurance to backpackers.  In its basic wording it   has the following clauses;

 

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. No section of this policy shall apply in respect of any claim arising directly or indirectly from using drugs (unless the drugs have been prescribed by a doctor) or where you are affected by any sexually transmitted disease or infection. We do not expect you to avoid alcohol consumption on your trips or holidays but we will not cover any claims arising because you have drunk so much alcohol that your judgement is seriously affected and you need to make a claim as a result (e.g. any medical claim where in the opinion of the treating doctor, your excessive alcohol consumption has caused or actively contributed to your injury or illness, including but not exclusively having a blood alcohol reading of more than 150mg per 100ml). 

 

Sports and other leisure activities You may not be covered when you take part in certain sports or activities where there is a high risk you will be injured. Please see section K on pages 24-25 of this booklet for information about dangerous or sporting activities that are covered at no extra premium under this policy (i.e. that you do not have to tell InsureandGo about). Please also refer to section O on pages 29-30 for details of those hazardous activities for which if you require cover, you will need to tell InsureandGo about and pay an extra premium.

 

Swimming is an insured activity. High diving is specifically excluded.

 

There is nothing unusual about a reckless condition. Intentionally harmful acts have always been a common exclusion of an insurance policy. For example, an automobile insurance policy will not insure my vehicle physical damage if I intentionally drive my vehicle into a brick wall.

My personal liability insurance will not  pay my legal liability if I sexually assault someone. Nor will my homeowner's insurance pay for the damage if I intentionally burn my home down.

 

Reckless means that the person knew (or should have known) that his or her action were likely to cause harm. In this case, if there were warning signs that diving was forbidden, i.e. diving warnings or if the person was warned to not dive into the pool and ignored the warnings, then yes, the coverage might have been denied on that basis. Remember that the obligation to support a claim is with the claimant, not the insurer. A claimant must provide supporting documentation of the  injury circumstances.

 

If there were no warnings visible, such as no diving allowed, then the insurer will reverse its position. The UK financial services regulator would rule in favour of the claimant.

[madmen]

Look at any capital city and you will see plenty skyscrapers with xyz insurance sign on top

[BobBKK]

6 hours ago, Lungstib said:

Diving into a swimming pool now considered reckless? The insurance company needs to be suitably shamed and harassed.

ALL swimming pools that I have ever seen here, or anywhere, have a No Diving policy and it's normally posted on a 'Swimming Pool Rules' notice around the pool area. That almost certainly being the case it is obvious the insurers will not pay out.

[SteveB2]

A few years ago, my family in the UK had problems with an insurance company not paying up for a household flood after an extended trip to Thailand.

 

The insurance company screwed them around for years, basically refusing to pay up what the policy was suppposed to cover.

 

Then one day, the local consumer protection agency(UK) told them to conplain to the FINANCIAL OMBUDSMAN SERVICE(UK)

 

On registering a complaint with the financial ombudsman, the insurance company called back to settle the claim immediately(within 24 hours) ... as long as my family immediately cancelled their complaint to the insurance ombudsman.

 

My family refused to cancel the complaint until full payment had been made - this took only a couple a week or two to sort out after years of refusals to pay.

 

This is the approach I recommend in this instance to the poor girls families - report the fraudulent insurance company to the financial ombudsman for immediately action and resolution of your claim.

 

Good luck to her!

[SheungWan]

4 hours ago, Wake Up said:

Sometimes injury lawyers are needed. I hope she finds a good one and sues this travel insurance company in the UK. Diving into a pool is not a reckless act it is a mistake of judgment. She didn’t jump out of a plane. She dove into a pool after seeing others do it and bought travel insurance so make them pay. 

The Its Not A Dead Parrot Argument.

[essox essox]

7 hours ago, flipperphillips said:

I have just read the insurance company involved is called, Insure & go.

is it a Thai insurance company or UK??

[BobBKK]

1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

The swimming pool at my current condo and the 2 condo's before this one ALL had signs saying 'No Diving'. I'd expect the one she jumped head first into also had signs of that nature. That is what makes it a reckless act.

Obviously but getting some TVF posters to understand that? well good luck with that!

[geriatrickid]

24 minutes ago, Ulic said:

Of course this is ridiculous. But this is what makes travel insurance companies billions. They don't pay claims. Many are like this. Small print exclusions, and in "their judgment". This story needs to be featured in the travel section of UK papers and wherever this company sells insurance. 

How do you know they don't pay claims? Can you read a financial statement?  I suggest you go and read the financial statement of the insurer in this case. It was running at a loss since it paid out more in claims  & admin costs than it made on premiums.

[geriatrickid]

4 minutes ago, essox essox said:

is it a Thai insurance company or UK??

Spanish multinational  licensed to transact in the UK

MAPFRE ASISTENCIA Compania Internacional De Seguros Y Reaseguros, S.A

[BobBKK]

2 minutes ago, SteveB2 said:

A few years ago, my family in the UK had problems with an insurance company not paying up for a household flood after an extended trip to Thailand.

 

The insurance company screwed them around for years, basically refusing to pay up what the policy was suppposed to cover.

 

Then one day, the local consumer protection agency(UK) told them to conplain to the FINACIAL OMBUDSMAN SERVICE(UK)

 

On registering a complaint with the finacial ombudsman, the insurance company called back to settle the claim immediately(within 24 hours) ... as long as my family immediately cancelled their complaint to the insurance ombudsman.

 

My family refused to cancel the complaint until full payment had been made - this took only a couple a week or two to sort out after years of refusals to pay.

 

This is the approach I recommend in this instance to the poor girls families - report the fraudulent insurance company to the insurance ombudsman for immediately action and resolution of your claim.

 

Good luck to her!

Yea good luck!

[SheungWan]

2 hours ago, Derek B said:

Maybe she actually only slipped & fell in head first - easily done and probably miss reported.

Then she would have to change her story to date.

[Sheryl]

6 hours ago, Crossy said:

My interpretetion of the story.

This is not diving as in scuba, this is diving as in having fun in a hotel pool (jumping in head first type diving).

Yes, that is mine as well.  We do not know the full details (?into the shallow end? Drunk? etc) but regardless the family should lodge a complaint with the Financial Ombudsman Service  https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumer/complaints.htm

[owl sees all]

7 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Obviously but getting some TVF posters to understand that? well good luck with that!

There are different ways of diving. Someone could dive, as they would in the start of a race, and not touch bottom in just one metre of water. On the other hand, diving in, as in springboard diving could, could be considered dangerous if the water was less than 2 metres deep.

 

I am not sure how she could hurt herself if diving in a correct manner.

[sometimewoodworker]

5 hours ago, ginjag said:

Flights to the UK just under 30,000 baht, Thai maybe 60,000 up.    Expose the Insurance company, Thai and UK press please.

You do need to do correct research a medical flight is rather different than that, and even if you can use a commercial flight the you need at least 8 seats and that is if the attendants can travel with the stretcher, and 2 attendants are enough.

 

You can't use a regular seat for a medical patient with a broken neck

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c-5WbaE6H68

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NhoqGXnXGNM

[geriatrickid]

25 minutes ago, madmen said:

Look at any capital city and you will see plenty skyscrapers with xyz insurance sign on top

What's your point? That the insurers pay for advertising?

[madmen]

What's your point? That the insurers pay for advertising?

Errm no.