AWP P&C S.A. · DRN-6158880

The complaint Mr and Mrs W complain that AWP P&C S.A. declined their claim against a travel insurance policy. Reference to AWP includes its agents. What happened Mr and Mrs W have travel insurance through their bank account. They booked a package holiday but, unfortunately, approximately a month before their planned departure, there was a major hurricane in the country they intended to visit. The travel provider offered Mr and Mrs W the option of postponing their trip to a date within the following 12 months or cancelling the trip without charge. Mr and Mrs W chose to cancel their trip. The travel provider refunded the trip costs. Mr and Mrs W made a claim against the policy in relation to their unrecovered costs, which were airline seat reservation costs. AWP declined the claim. It said Mr and Mrs W’s claim does not come within the policy terms. Mr and Mrs W did not think that was fair and pursued their complaint. Mr and Mrs W say they expected AWP to cover their losses in relation to their cancelled trip. They say they paid for advanced seat reservations because they wanted to ensure they were sitting together on a long flight. Mr and Mrs W want AWP to settle their claim. One of our Investigators looked at what had happened. She did not think AWP had acted unfairly in declining Mr and Mrs W’s claim in line with the policy terms and conditions. Mr and Mrs W did not agree. They think it is unfair that AWP has not settled their claim after their trip was cancelled due to a major hurricane. The Investigator considered what Mr and Mrs W said but did not change her view. Mr and Mrs W asked that an Ombudsman consider their complaint, so it was passed to me to decide. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. I have taken into account the law, regulations and good practice. Above all, I’ve considered what’s fair and reasonable. The relevant rules and industry guidance say AWP has a responsibility to handle claims promptly and fairly and must act to deliver good outcomes for retail consumers. Insurance policies are not designed to cover every eventuality or situation. An insurer, AWP in this case, will decide what risks it is willing to cover and set these out in the policy. In general and, as long as consumers are treated fairly, insurers can decide what risks they wish to cover. The onus is on the consumer to show the claim falls under one of the agreed areas of cover within the policy. Subject to the policy terms and limits, Mr and Mrs W’s policy covers irrecoverable unused travel and accommodation costs if they cancel their trip for certain specified reasons.

-- 1 of 2 --

Those reasons are death, injury or illness; quarantine; jury service; compulsory redundancy; cancelled leave for certain professions; a police request to remain home after certain events; medical complications in pregnancy and denial of boarding due to symptoms of a contagious disease. These are common terms in a policy like this. There is no cover for cancellation due to adverse weather. There is cover where a trip is cut short because there is a government directive after the trip has started prohibiting all travel to or evacuation from the area the insured were staying in or planned to stay in. That does not assist Mr and Mrs W because their trip was cancelled, not cut short. Whilst the government directive may be from any government, I have looked at the advice of the Foreign Commonwealth and Development office (FCDO) at the relevant time. The FCDO did not prohibit travel to or evacuation from Mr and Mrs W’s planned destination at the relevant time; instead, it said travellers should exercise caution and follow the guidance of local authorities. I have looked at the remaining terms and conditions of the policy. There is no cover for what happened here. I have considered whether that leads to a fair and reasonable outcome in this case. AWP did not agree to cover the risk of cancellation of a trip because of adverse weather. I am sorry to disappoint Mr and Mrs W, but there are no grounds on which I can fairly require AWP to settle their claim outside the terms and conditions of the policy. My final decision My final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr W and Mrs W to accept or reject my decision before 24 April 2026. Louise Povey Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --