Insurer says if it had been told about the ear infection, it would’ve charged an extra premium.
Shortly before travelling, Tom had received prolonged treatment for an ear infection. The insurer said if it had been told about this at the time, it would’ve charged Tom an extra premium.
To decide if we thought Tom’s ear infection was a significant change in health which he should’ve told his insurer about, we looked at all of the circumstances and Tom’s medical records showing what he’d been told about his ear infection by his doctor.
How we helped
We saw that Tom had been to the doctors three times over the course of a few weeks – first receiving ear drops and then antibiotics when the infection didn’t clear up. Although the doctor noted it was a severe infection, he told Tom it was likely to clear up with general antibiotics and that he was unlikely to experience any after-effects. There was no indication that Tom was given any reason to think it might be something more serious.
Overall, we didn’t think it was fair to consider the ear infection a significant change in health which Mr T should’ve told his insurer about. So, we asked the insurer to pay the claim in full.