My husband contacted Nat West and he was told that as his mum did not live here we were not covered. I cannot understand why this is part of their policy, surely it is indirect race discrimination as it disproportionately and adversely affects ethnic origin people. Can they do this? Please can you help.

I cannot understand your assertion of discrimination. You do need to read the wording of the policy to confirm exactly what is cover is given and any specific exclusions.
Pre existing conditions, not only of the traveler but close relations if not declared are excluded.

fwh

So sorry to hear of your loss.
That fact that his mum did not live in the UK, I don't think, should come into it. She wasn't on the policy in the first place. As long as she wasn't ill with whatever it was, when the policy came into force I would have thought (depending on the cover the policy offers) that you should be covered.

I'm sorry for your husband's loss - such a tragic ending to your holiday.

But re your question here as to whether Nat West can refuse your claim, can I just clarify - does your mother-in-law live in India and whilst you were out there, she fell ill and so you had to delay your return to the UK? Or did she travel out to Goa with you and neither lives there nor in the UK? Most travel insurance will cover you for an early return home from holiday in these circumstances but even then only if it was unforeseen or you have declared any pre-existing condition on the part of a close relative that might require such a curtailment of a holiday. It does sound insensitive on their part but I assume that Nat West are arguing that it was your choice not to use your return tickets and to extend your stay without checking with them as to whether you were covered or not first?

On the whole, I think that if your MiL lives in India, and ven more so if one of your reasons for going to Goa was to visit her, then your situation probably isn't covered by standard holiday insurance. I've looked at mine and as far as I can see it would cover me for returning early in order to get back home to my usual place of residence in such an emergency. But I would only be covered for extending my stay and/or having to purchase later flights to do so, if it was due to the ill health of a family member that I was travelling with, not someone that lived out there and I was visiting. I think that this would even apply if that was my sole reason for travelling in the first place unless I disclosed the details in advance and checked that I had cover for what could turn into a visit of indeterminate length.

I don't think that this is a case of racism, just coincidence that you were visiting India at the time when she became ill. This could happen to anybody who visits family living overseas, including people in the UK visiting family who have emigrated from the UK. Apart from one cousin, my mother now has no close relatives on her side of the family still alive and living in the UK - they all gradually emigrated to Australia over the years and there must be lots of others in just the same position because so many people from Scotland have emigrated all over the world. Had something like this happened when any of the family from the UK where out in Australia then they would have been caught out in just the same way. I think it raises the point that anybody visiting relatives abroad should look very carefully at their holiday insurance to see exactly what is covered.

Please try and take some consolation from the the fact that your husband was on hand when this happened. A good friend is currently having to deal with the distress in her family as a result of her father-in-law falling seriously ill in Pakistan and not only dying but being buried in accordance with Muslim tradition before her husband and other relatives in the UK were able to arrive over there.

SM

sorry to say that is the problem with nearly all the so called free travel insurances offed by banks etc. they are not worth the money you didn't pay for it. I too have free insurance with my bank account but would never travel without a comprehensive policy which i buy each year

wizard

I've the same view as SMa.

As I read it, the lady lived in India and was not part of the group who travelled from UK with you on your visit to India.

Insurance will usually cover you for staying with a friend or relative in your booked party who has to be held in hospital abroad during the trip - I'm not sure it would even cover relatives who had travelled seperately and met up whilst abroad. It will also cover you for getting home early if certain people with a close personal or business relationship are taken ill in your absence. And it will cover certain relatives going out to be with you if you are taken ill whilst away. But in all those cases they will normally exclude pre-existing illnesses and they will want access to records to check that.

Your case isn't discrimination, it's just cold, hard business. Insurance basically only covers two groups of events;

1. Things that are unlikely to ever happen.

2. Things that can be very tightly monitored or controlled by the underwriter.

Insurance with a bank account is unlikley to be as generous or flexible as a proper policy but I think you would struggle to find any policy that would have covered your situation.

And Wizard, I suggest you write to your bank and formally cancel the unwanted insurance, if anything goes wrong and causes a big claim the other company may try to duck out and split costs if another policy is in existence.

Of concern to me is the suggestion that the rejection of the claim is racial or discrimanatory. I doubt insurers ever consider such things. Their objective is to reduce the risk of them ever having to pay out. Race or ethnic origin will only enter the equation if someone of a particular race or ethnic origin are more inclined to develop a particular illness/condition. Being diagnosed as a Type 2 Diabetic even thogh you are not on any medication automatically increases premiums with some insurers whilst others simply need to be advised that a diagnosis has been made. Or perhaps a better example in this day and age is age itself. Premiums are higher for just that reason. No account is taken about the fitness or lifestyle of people much younger. It is simply the perceived risk - nothing more.

fwh