Cruise Travel Insurance cover for future cruising

[bbtablet]

Presumably, in future all passengers will want to/be required to have travel insurance cover for corona virus, but the insurance companies will not cover it at the moment.

When they do, we fear the extra cost is likely to be so expensive for me and my wife, both in our 70's and with notifiable medical conditionsl, that it will be out of all proportion to the cost of the holiday and we might have to cancel. Do others see it this way? 

Bernard.

[terrierjohn]

14 minutes ago, bbtablet said:

Presumably, in future all passengers will want to/be required to have travel insurance cover for corona virus, but the insurance companies will not cover it at the moment.

When they do, we fear the extra cost is likely to be so expensive for me and my wife, both in our 70's and with notifiable medical conditionsl, that it will be out of all proportion to the cost of the holiday and we might have to cancel. Do others see it this way? 

Bernard.

I am hoping not.  It seems likely that most insurers will continue to offer emergency medical cover, which includes repatriation, but they won't cover cancellation and curtailment. However the latter 2 should be covered by the cruise lines or s75 credit card claims.

[Harry Peterson]

For anyone in their 70s with certain pre-existing medical conditions I suspect the insurance costs will indeed be out of proportion - though that's a decision which will depend very much on individuals' own perception of proportionality.

 

The medical costs involved in a Covid-19 claim could be enormous, so you can understand the reluctance of insurers to cover it, particularly for at-risk groups, and particularly given the high infectivity.

 

Cancellation by the cruise company shouldn't be a problem, once they've started complying with the law on refunds again, assuming that they do, but if the customer cancels of course insurance would be the only way to recover lost deposits etc..

[tring]

2 hours ago, bbtablet said:

Presumably, in future all passengers will want to/be required to have travel insurance cover for corona virus, but the insurance companies will not cover it at the moment.

When they do, we fear the extra cost is likely to be so expensive for me and my wife, both in our 70's and with notifiable medical conditionsl, that it will be out of all proportion to the cost of the holiday and we might have to cancel. Do others see it this way? 

Bernard.

 

Not clear of your meaning.  If you are referring to having to cancel any cruise you had booked prior to the COVID problems (before 18th March for our insurance), then you should still be fully covered for that (those), if you keep and, if neccesary, renew an annual insurance which covers that.  It is newly booked cruises which will not be covered, though should a vaccine or good treatment become available then insurance should cover it as a matter of course and will not be a high risk.  Yes, some price increases still expected though, but how much remains to be seen. 

Edited May 31, 2020 by tring

[bbtablet]

20 minutes ago, tring said:

 

Not clear of your meaning.  If you are referring to having to cancel any cruise you had booked prior to the COVID problems (before 18th March for our insurance), then you should still be fully covered for that (those), if you keep and, if neccesary, renew an annual insurance which covers that.  It is newly booked cruises which will not be covered, though should a vaccine or good treatment become available then insurance should cover it as a matter of course and will not be a high risk.  Yes, some price increases still expected though, but how much remains to be seen. 

Thanks for this. We had a cruise already booked and insured before March 2020 but have had to transfer it to 2021 and so new insurance taken out that states no cover for repatriation etc if caused by COVD19, and they have re-confirmed that to me. So I will need to buy specific COVID 19 cover to tack onto that one. The other cruise in late 2021 we have not taken any insurance out for yet, but expect the premiums when we do to be even higher than usual for the Caribbean, perhaps astronomically so.

[jeanlyon]

I did a quote with Staysure for 2 of us one over 70 the other over 80 with conditions.  It wasn't that bad at all and they do cover if you get Covid on board or ashore, but not if you get it before you cruise and have to cancel.

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, Harry Peterson said:

For anyone in their 70s with certain pre-existing medical conditions I suspect the insurance costs will indeed be out of proportion - though that's a decision which will depend very much on individuals' own perception of proportionality.

 

The medical costs involved in a Covid-19 claim could be enormous, so you can understand the reluctance of insurers to cover it, particularly for at-risk groups, and particularly given the high infectivity.

 

Cancellation by the cruise company shouldn't be a problem, once they've started complying with the law on refunds again, assuming that they do, but if the customer cancels of course insurance would be the only way to recover lost deposits etc..

Not sure that will be true if they only offer emergency medical cover for covid. The numbers becoming infected on a cruise would very likely be small or probably nil, so not a major cost for the insurer.

[Harry Peterson]

27 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Not sure that will be true if they only offer emergency medical cover for covid. The numbers becoming infected on a cruise would very likely be small or probably nil, so not a major cost for the insurer.

I'm thinking in terms of the costs per person - potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds or more.  And the age profile of cruises is pretty high compared with other holidays, increasing the risk further.

 

You can see why they'd load the premiums.

[terrierjohn]

 

So your 

3 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

I'm thinking in terms of the costs per person - potentially hundreds of thousands of pounds or more.  And the age profile of cruises is pretty high compared with other holidays, increasing the risk further.

 

You can see why they'd load the premiums.

I dont think any covid patient would need to be helicoptered  off a ship, unless ports still insist on making a covid ship a plague ship and refuse to offload patients to a local hospital.

So your estimate of hundreds of thousands of pounds in costs is way over the top, even in a serious outbreak.

If the tourist industry really wants to get back up and running then there needs to be sensible arrangements made to cover any possible outbreak in hotels or cruise ships.  The ridiculous way the initial outbreaks were handled need to be condemned to the past, and a better more sensible approach will be needed.

To this end there needs to be a change to the way social media posts are made. I dont want a ban on the sensationalist comments people make, BUT posters need to realise that some people are not able to understand how some extreme and outlandish statements are made simply to emphasise a worst case scenario  we should therefore try to make our posts more balanced.

[Harry Peterson]

1 hour ago, terrierjohn said:

 

So your 

I dont think any covid patient would need to be helicoptered  off a ship, unless ports still insist on making a covid ship a plague ship and refuse to offload patients to a local hospital.

So your estimate of hundreds of thousands of pounds in costs is way over the top, even in a serious outbreak.

If the tourist industry really wants to get back up and running then there needs to be sensible arrangements made to cover any possible outbreak in hotels or cruise ships.  The ridiculous way the initial outbreaks were handled need to be condemned to the past, and a better more sensible approach will be needed.

To this end there needs to be a change to the way social media posts are made. I dont want a ban on the sensationalist comments people make, BUT posters need to realise that some people are not able to understand how some extreme and outlandish statements are made simply to emphasise a worst case scenario  we should therefore try to make our posts more balanced.

I think we must agree to differ on what I referred to as the potential costs.  Covid-19 poses a substantial risk for the elderly, particularly with underlying health conditions, and could easily lead to a lengthy hospital stay, quite possibly in an ICU.

 

ICU costs per day in the US run into several thousand dollars, and patients have been in ICU for as long as two months - on top of that there are all the other medical and ancillary costs.

 

Medical costs in the US in particular are horrendous.  I stand by the figure, and that's precisely why insurers have acted as they have done.  Not every case will cost this, of course, but some will - hence the use of the word potential.

[jeanlyon]

A friend of mine in Australia who is a senior doctor does not think there will be a vaccine.  They never got one for the common cold, SARS or MERS.  They are all coronaviruses.

[bbtablet]

The word AVACTA may soon be on all our lips, and it might be the way forward for ensuring a virus-free cruise by enabling a cheap, quick and binary proof one way or the other of whether we have the virus at the moment of boarding, not only at Southampton but also at every port of call.

[wowzz]

2 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

Covid-19 poses a substantial risk for the elderly, particularly with underlying health conditions, and could easily lead to a lengthy hospital stay, quite possibly in an ICU.

If you fall into this category, you should not be going on on  a holiday of any sort, let alone a cruise.  Nothing to do with insurance,  just pure common sense. You are at risk- stay at home!

[Harry Peterson]

6 hours ago, wowzz said:

If you fall into this category, you should not be going on on  a holiday of any sort, let alone a cruise.  Nothing to do with insurance,  just pure common sense. You are at risk- stay at home!

I do agree.  But people are people, and strangely only yesterday the government announced that although nothing has changed in the science, people in this very category are now 'safe' to go out.

[terrierjohn]

3 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

I do agree.  But people are people, and strangely only yesterday the government announced that although nothing has changed in the science, people in this very category are now 'safe' to go out.

Not exactly what they said Harry, the experts have all said that the spread outside is much lower than inside and that at 2 metres it is extremely low.  So that even people who are in the shielded group can reasonably safely now go outside and meet ONE other person not in their household.  Science can only tell us what has happened in the past, humans have to decide for themselves if they want to take the baby steps out of this lockdown nightmare.

[bbtablet]

If we all wait until it is safe to go out, we will never go out.

 

Life has always been full of risks and now there is one more to manage - each person must decide, within the guidance offered, what they will do regarding venturing back into the world and then have the courage to go for it.

 

One thing is for sure - if we never venture out again we will all die indoors.

 

Statistics show that the bed is the most dangerous piece of furniture in a house - most people die in one.

[jeanlyon]

I'm 73 and went back to the office for the first time today.  What a nice experience.  We have our new screens.  Proper wipes.  Fantastic and easy.

[Harry Peterson]

On 5/31/2020 at 9:32 PM, Harry Peterson said:

I think we must agree to differ on what I referred to as the potential costs.  Covid-19 poses a substantial risk for the elderly, particularly with underlying health conditions, and could easily lead to a lengthy hospital stay, quite possibly in an ICU.

 

ICU costs per day in the US run into several thousand dollars, and patients have been in ICU for as long as two months - on top of that there are all the other medical and ancillary costs.

 

Medical costs in the US in particular are horrendous.  I stand by the figure, and that's precisely why insurers have acted as they have done.  Not every case will cost this, of course, but some will - hence the use of the word potential.

Just as a follow up to this, here's an example of costs likely to exceed a million dollars, and that's for just a fortnight in ICU. 

 

This is what scares insurers.

 

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/covid-survivor-receives-840-000-statement-for-treatment-with-more-on-the-way

 

Total bill estimated at 1.5 million dollars.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Harry Peterson

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, Harry Peterson said:

Just as a follow up to this, here's an example of costs likely to exceed a million dollars, and that's for just a fortnight in ICU. 

 

This is what scares insurers.

 

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/covid-survivor-receives-840-000-statement-for-treatment-with-more-on-the-way

 

Total bill estimated at 1.5 million dollars.

Well its a good job we are limiting our cruises to Europe now, I doubt European costs will be anything like US costs, and just maybe we might still have EHIC cards, which will ensure that UK and EU govts foot the bills and not our insurers.

[davecttr]

11 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Well its a good job we are limiting our cruises to Europe now, I doubt European costs will be anything like US costs, and just maybe we might still have EHIC cards, which will ensure that UK and EU govts foot the bills and not our insurers.

My annual travel insurance is due for renewal next month. It is part of the bank account so I have a choice. Leave it with world cover or change to the one with Europe only for £10 a month less, or even the account with no travel insurance for £20 per month less. I don't see me going abroad this year and next year maybe the first of two local cruises to reach my bucket list total of 50 so I could just have single trip insurance. Now the complicated bit of getting the bank account changed. I had already decided that after 50 cruises I would visit all the places in the UK that I have missed over the years and I don't need insurance for that.

[happy v]

35 minutes ago, davecttr said:

My annual travel insurance is due for renewal next month. It is part of the bank account so I have a choice. Leave it with world cover or change to the one with Europe only for £10 a month less, or even the account with no travel insurance for £20 per month less. I don't see me going abroad this year and next year maybe the first of two local cruises to reach my bucket list total of 50 so I could just have single trip insurance. Now the complicated bit of getting the bank account changed. I had already decided that after 50 cruises I would visit all the places in the UK that I have missed over the years and I don't need insurance for that.

I think I would check how much single trip insurance is going to cost first.

[molecrochip]

Its interesting that StaySure have announced that they will include Covid-19 cover in their new and existing policies from here onwards. Requirements are that travel is inline with FCO guidelines so they need to change first.

 

Obviously, I'm not recommending StaySure, just making an observation on a significant market development.

[Harry Peterson]

8 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

.......... and just maybe we might still have EHIC cards, which will ensure that UK and EU govts foot the bills and not our insurers.

Not the way negotiations are currently going with the EU. No deal’s looking increasingly likely, with all the chaos at the ports that’ll bring, and reciprocal health agreements may also be a casualty. Wonderful.

[davecttr]

8 hours ago, happy v said:

I think I would check how much single trip insurance is going to cost first.

Good point. account based annual European policy would cost at least £120 plus the medical condition additions, currently about £130 so will a 7 day European policy cost £250.

 

I also need to find out their definition of 'europe', apparently some policies don't include Spain!.

[silversurf1]

Staysure have just quoted us £750 for a two week cruise in Europe. We are both over 70 with medical conditions but nothing life threatening. That’s a lot of money.