We lost £10,000 when insurer refused to cover cancelled cruise

MY WIFE and I were due to go on a 35-day Caribbean cruise last February. Prior to departure, my mother-in-law got swine flu and was hospitalised. My wife felt she could not leave the country, so we cancelled the trip.

We had insurance with Staysure, but trying to claim some of the cost is proving nigh on impossible. We stand to lose £10,656 for the cruise, plus £65 obtaining medical certificates.

My mother-in-law suffers from COPD (a pulmonary disease that causes breathing difficulties) and Staysure is saying her swine flu is related to this.

Having a flu-like illness alongside a lung disease makes symptoms worse, but I do not see a direct connection.

G. K., Nottingham. So anyone with an elderly relative shouldn’t plan a holiday in case that relative falls sick? That is surely what Staysure’s stance was implying, as, let’s face it, most elderly people are on some medication. This is abject nonsense.

The Financial ombudsman has ruled against insurance firms in similar circumstances — in particular when there is no reason to believe that the state of a parent’s health would force you to cancel a holiday.

Issue 56 of ombudsman news, found at financial-ombudsman.

org.uk, focuses on this and other disputes on travel insurance.

So it came as little surprise when Staysure told me it had altered its policy wording in March to take account of cases where holidays have to be cancelled because of the unforeseen deterioration in a close family member’s health.

The new wording says cover includes cancellation caused when ‘you, a close relative, a travelling companion or any person with whom you have arranged to stay during the trip suffers unforeseen illness, injury or death’.

It also covers pre-existing conditions where ‘there would not have been any substantial likelihood of the condition deteriorating so that cancellation or cutting your trip short would become necessary’. The latter needs a medical practitioner to provide written confirmation.

you bought your insurance in January, so your policy had the old wording, but a spokesperson assures me claims made on older policies should be treated as if the new wording applies. Here, a mistake was made. The firm has now agreed to pay £10,000 (the maximum available under the policy) towards your lost holiday. It has waived the £65-per-person excess as a goodwill gesture, too.

a spokesman says: ‘We strive to provide industry-best cover. That means listening to our customers so our policies are designed with their needs in mind.’ IN JANUARY, I got an email from my energy provider saying it was sorry I was leaving.

It informed me that I should phone Scottish Power, which had applied to take over both my gas and electricity.

I spent two-and-a-half hours trying to get through to Scottish Power, and it emerged someone I had never heard of had given it my address. I was told this would be treated as an erroneous transfer and cancelled if I raised an objection with my supplier.

I did so, but received 15 letters from Scottish Power addressed to this other person. I have tried calling and writing, to no avail.

S. D., Sheffield. ScoTTISH PoWer apologises for the problems you had. This sale was, apparently, made at a pop-up shop in a supermarket.

It seems an error was made with the postcode, which led to your address being picked up.

you feared your supply had twice been moved erroneously, but it did only happen once.

It has now been reinstated with your last provider and Scottish Power has arranged a £60 payment as a gesture of goodwill. MY PARTNER’S son was involved in a motor accident 22 years ago. It left him with a head injury and needing 24hour care. Alliance & Leicester — later Santander — agreed to let her look after his account.

Last year, my partner was diagnosed with motor neurone disease, and her condition is deteriorating. I have power of attorney (POA) over her affairs, including her account with Santander, but the bank says that I need a separate POA for her son.

His solicitors, who are Court of Protection-appointed managers of his affairs, contacted Santander. It was agreed that all we needed to do was present ourselves at the branch, where my partner’s son could agree to me managing his account.

But the bank has now reneged on this and is insisting on POA, which will be costly to obtain.

J. O., Hertford. you are, in effect, this man’s stepfather — a role you have held for many years. yet Santander is treating you like someone who has just wandered into his life. It has now admitted that it provided you with incorrect information.

It has agreed to explore ways of managing the account with you and your partner’s son’s appointed deputy, i.e. a solicitor. It will, at your request, be donating £50 to charity on his behalf.