Zurich Insurance Company Ltd · DRN-6285280

The complaint Mr S complains that Zurich Insurance Company Ltd declined his travel insurance claim. My references to Zurich include its claim handling agents. What happened Mr S had single trip travel insurance, insured by Zurich. He says his flight was cancelled by the airline the day before departure due to strike action and he booked a replacement flight at short notice so he could go on his trip. He claimed on the policy for the unused flight and additional costs incurred, approximately £2,300. Zurich declined the claim. It said the circumstances of the claim weren’t covered under the ‘Cancellation’ policy section. The claim also wasn’t covered under the ‘Delayed Departure, Trip Abandonment, and Flight Cancellation’ section as that required Mr S to have checked in for a flight unless the airline had told him not to travel to the departure point. Zurich said he hadn’t provided evidence to meet that criteria. Mr S complained to us. In summary he said: • The ‘Delayed Departure, Trip Abandonment, and Flight Cancellation’ policy section did cover his claim. The airline cancelled his flight and said not to go to the airport which made check in impossible. • Zurich didn’t apply the policy terms fairly nor act in line with the Financial Conduct Authority’s principles of treating customers fairly. • He wants Zurich to pay his claim. He also wants compensation as the complaint process had taken up a lot of his time, which is limited as he is self employed, and caused him considerable stress and frustration. Our Investigator said Zurich had reasonably declined the claim. Mr S disagreed and wanted an Ombudsman’s decision. What I provisionally decided – and why I made a provisional decision explaining why Zurich should reassess the claim. I said: ‘I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. The relevant regulator’s rules say that insurers must handle claims promptly and fairly and they mustn’t turn down claims unreasonably. Mr S’ claim isn’t covered by the insured events for a cancelled trip listed in the policy under the ‘Cancellation’ section, which he accepts. His point is that the claim is covered under the ‘Delayed departure, Trip abandonment and Flight cancellation’ policy section, which says:

-- 1 of 5 --

‘1. Delayed departure If your departure is delayed because the public transport carrier you have checked in for is delayed by at least 12 hours from the time shown in your travel itinerary, as a result of strike, industrial action… we will pay up to the limits specified: A. after 12 hours delay, being a benefit to contribute towards: I. the costs of accessing an airport lounge at your departure point; II. out of pocket expenses incurred at your departure point such as the cost of food drink and telephone calls B. for every following full 12 hours’ delay of your trip; being a benefit intended to contribute towards any additional out of pocket expenses. 2. Trip abandonment If you have a valid claim for delayed departure under Events 1 above and choose to abandon your trip before leaving your home country and after a delay of 24 hours or more from the time shown in your travel itinerary, you may claim for cancellation costs (as provided for under the ‘Cancellation’ cover). 3. Flight cancellation (additional travel costs) If you have checked in for a flight on your outward or return journey and it is cancelled after 4 or more hours delay from the time shown in your travel itinerary as a result of strike, industrial action...we will pay up to the limits specified for extra accommodation (room only) and transport charges (up to the same standard of those previously booked) that are necessary incurred to enable you to reach your trip destination on your outward journey or your home on your return journey. Section conditions 1. You must check-in according to the itinerary of your trip unless your public transport carrier has requested you not to travel to the departure point. 2. You must have written confirmation from the public transport carrier or its agents confirming the reason for delay, the length of the delay (including actual departure time). Where you are claiming for Flight cancellation under Events 3, above, you must also provide written confirmation from the carrier as to when the flight was cancelled. 3. We will deduct the amount of any refunds due from the carrier or its authorized agent and any associated taxes recoverable from the authorities, from any claim payable under Events 2 and 3’. Mr S says his flight was cancelled due to strike action, which is an insured event, and Zurich hasn’t disputed the cause of the flight’s cancellation. Zurich declined the claim because Mr S hadn’t checked in when the flight was cancelled and although there was an exception to check in if the airline had told him not to travel to the departure point, it said he hadn’t provided evidence that he met the criteria.

-- 2 of 5 --

Mr S sent us the email he’d received from the airline, dated 16 August 2025, which said: ‘We’re very sorry your booking was cancelled on (flight details given). Our systems look for flight options on more than 120 carriers, for up to three days after your cancelled flight. Unfortunately, we have not found any available options suitable for your itinerary’. The airline’s email doesn’t explicitly say Mr S mustn’t travel to the airport. So on a strict application of the policy terms Zurich correctly said the claim didn’t meet the criteria in the policy terms. But I’ve also considered what’s fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the complaint. I think it’s clear from the airline’s email that the airline is telling Mr S not to travel to the airport to check in, there was no point as the flight he’d been booked onto was cancelled and the airline couldn’t find an alternative flight within three days of the cancelled flight. Looking at the other relevant special conditions for cover above, Zurich hasn’t disputed the reason for flight cancellation and the date of the above email provides written confirmation from the airline as to when the flight was cancelled. I’m satisfied, on a fair and reasonable basis, that as in effect the airline had told Mr S not to travel to the airport departure point to check in Zurich should reassess the claim under the relevant policy terms in the ‘Delayed departure, Trip abandonment and Flight cancellation’ section, subject to the applicable policy limits and excess. Once Zurich has assessed the claim if Mr S isn’t in agreement with Zurich’s suggested settlement he can complain to it and ultimately make a separate complaint to us. I think it’s fair for me to tell Mr S that under the flight cancellation policy terms the cost of his cancelled flight isn’t covered and he may want to contact the airline about a possible refund. I appreciate that Mr S has spent time and been inconvenienced in making his complaint. But I don’t generally award compensation for the time a consumer spends in making a complaint and there’s no reason for me to do so in this case. Mr S has been stressed due to Zurich’s decision but it correctly declined the claim on a strict interpretation of the policy terms, my decision is based on about what’s fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. Overall, I’m not going to make a compensation award’. Responses to my provisional decision Mr S accepted my provisional decision. Zurich said: • Before the airline told Mr S about the cancellation he’d already rebooked his flights to another outbound flight on the original departure date and a return flight on the original return date. Only the outbound flight was cancelled so it wasn’t clear why Mr S also rebooked the return flight. • It had found information which it said meant any costs associated with the airline’s flight cancellations during the relevant period are entirely covered by the airline. So the airline should pay the costs incurred by Mr S due to the flight cancellation.

-- 3 of 5 --

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. Zurich has done some reassessment of the claim in response to my provisional decision. I’ve seen the point it makes about the date Mr S booked his new flights which it will need to ask him about as part of its reassessment of the claim. But it appears to me the point remains that his flight was cancelled due to a strike. Zurich also sent us what appears to be an online news article about the relevant airline dated 21 August 2025. Part of the article says: ‘Today, the airline updated its goodwill policy to cover reasonable additional accommodation and out-of-pocket expenses incurred by customers as a result of the labour disruption at the airline. The updated, exceptional policy applies to customers whose original travel was disrupted between August 15 and 23, 2025 inclusive’. I’ve arranged for our Investigator to send the article to Mr S so he can make enquiries with the airline. Mr S can then liaise with Zurich about the airline’s response to his situation and costs he’s claimed on the policy. Mr S should note that the above policy terms include that for a flight cancellation claim Zurich: ‘will deduct the amount of any refunds due from the carrier or its authorized agent and any associated taxes recoverable from the authorities, from any claim payable’. Overall for the reasons I’ve given in my provisional findings and these findings Zurich should reassess the claim under the relevant policy terms in the ‘Delayed departure, Trip abandonment and Flight cancellation’ section, subject to the applicable policy limits and excess. Zurich and Mr S should liaise direct about the additional information Zurich has now provided and the airline’s response so Zurich can complete its reassessment of the claim. Once Zurich has fully reassessed the claim if Mr S isn’t in agreement with Zurich’s suggested settlement he can complain to it and ultimately make a separate complaint to us. As I said, under the flight cancellation policy terms the cost of his cancelled flight isn’t covered and he can contact the airline about a possible refund if not already received. For the reasons I’ve given in my provisional findings there’s no basis for me to make a compensation award for Mr S’ distress and inconvenience. My final decision I require Zurich Insurance Company Ltd to reassess Mr S’ claim under the relevant policy terms in the ‘Delayed departure, Trip abandonment and Flight cancellation’ section, subject to the applicable policy limits and excess. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 13 May 2026. Nicola Sisk Ombudsman

-- 4 of 5 --

-- 5 of 5 --