Soon, the holiday season begins again. And for those who are currently facing a serious illness, hopes to be fit again at the beginning of the well-deserved holidays. However, you shouldn`t wait too long.
This is shown by a recent decision of a regional court in Coburg, 27 March 2009 (AZ: 32 S 7 / 09), which is indicated by the Insurance Association of the German Bar Association (DAV).
In that case a man had his trip until a week before the start of which cancellation amounting to about Euro 1150 have suffered. Has replaced his trip cancellation insurance, but only 200 euros, in the event of a cancellation until 30 days before departure would have.
The court has the right insurance, and the long wait of the man rated as grossly negligent. According to lawyer Arno Schubach by the Insurance Association of the DAV, but it does not mean that early stage may be canceled if not yet predict whether the journey can be: "To suggest that in such cases, his physician time to assess to ask.
Following is a policyholder rating of his doctor, so he will not be accused of gross negligence may be. "Wool of policyholders on the safe side, he should also advance with his trip cancellation insurance in touch and action with their vote.
Posts mit dem Label court decision werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label court decision werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
5/11/2009
4/20/2009
Holidays: In case of severe disease, cancel quickly!
0
Kommentare
Labels: cancellation costs, court decision, severe desease, Trip cancellation, Trip cancellation insurance
Labels: cancellation costs, court decision, severe desease, Trip cancellation, Trip cancellation insurance
Even with a completed trip cancellation insurance, ill tourists can be threatened with high costs.
Because those who have the knowledge of their illness, cancel too late and thus increased reversal costs, may have lost their claim against the insurance partially. This was the district of a court on Friday that the claim of a holiday to the full reimbursement of the cancellation costs declined. The man had barely even pay 1000 euros.
The man had four months before beginning a long holiday booked toes have been amputated. Although it is in the healing of severe complications and had a second operation was necessary, the man said the trip just a week before the scheduled start from. Of the cancellation fees in the amount of 1150 euros, the insurance then just 200 euros. Their reasoning: This amount would be incurred, the plaintiff would have to travel at least 30 days before canceled.
The judges plead for the insurance company. The plaintiff had the contractual obligation, upon the occurrence of the insured event to travel immediately to cancel to the cancellation costs will be minimized. This he had "grossly negligent" violated, they argued. At least two months before the holidays start had him because of the complications, "must be imposed that the hardships of a trip without the care provided by nurses would be unable to cope."
Because those who have the knowledge of their illness, cancel too late and thus increased reversal costs, may have lost their claim against the insurance partially. This was the district of a court on Friday that the claim of a holiday to the full reimbursement of the cancellation costs declined. The man had barely even pay 1000 euros.
The man had four months before beginning a long holiday booked toes have been amputated. Although it is in the healing of severe complications and had a second operation was necessary, the man said the trip just a week before the scheduled start from. Of the cancellation fees in the amount of 1150 euros, the insurance then just 200 euros. Their reasoning: This amount would be incurred, the plaintiff would have to travel at least 30 days before canceled.
The judges plead for the insurance company. The plaintiff had the contractual obligation, upon the occurrence of the insured event to travel immediately to cancel to the cancellation costs will be minimized. This he had "grossly negligent" violated, they argued. At least two months before the holidays start had him because of the complications, "must be imposed that the hardships of a trip without the care provided by nurses would be unable to cope."
2/23/2009
Judges: Common diseases don`t count for cancellation
The hospitalization in a hospital for the purpose of finding a diagnosis of complaints isn`t a reason for cancellation.
In a now determined by the Amtsgericht Munich instance, booked the later applicants, 22 January 2007 for himself and his wife on holiday to Norway to the total price of 3230 euros. The 14-day trip should be commenced on 28.3.07. The wife of the plaintiff since 1996, suffered fainting attacks due to heart disease. She received in 2002 so a pacemaker. In October 2006 there were about dizziness. That's why she went on 5.1.07 in medical treatment. On 9.3.07, she went to a routine review of the pacemaker in a university hospital and was there for the clarification of the cause of the dizziness of stationary. On the same day her husband canceled the trip and demanded cancellation of the travel insurer reimbursed. It refused to pay, since the illness of the wife already existed for a while. The husband brought attention to the action before the AG in Munich. The judge dismissed the claim, however:
The travel insurance should only pay if the trip due to an unexpected serious illness was unreasonable. This was done but the cancellation because the wife of another diagnosis had been stationary. A cancellation as a result of diagnosis performed but not covered under the insured risk. You know, just because the diagnosis has yet to be implemented, not yet, whether a disease exists. In addition, the disease would also, one should accept it, certainly not unexpected. The wife finally had since October 2006 to the attacks suffered from impotence and at 5.1.07, so even before the posting in medical treatment.
In a now determined by the Amtsgericht Munich instance, booked the later applicants, 22 January 2007 for himself and his wife on holiday to Norway to the total price of 3230 euros. The 14-day trip should be commenced on 28.3.07. The wife of the plaintiff since 1996, suffered fainting attacks due to heart disease. She received in 2002 so a pacemaker. In October 2006 there were about dizziness. That's why she went on 5.1.07 in medical treatment. On 9.3.07, she went to a routine review of the pacemaker in a university hospital and was there for the clarification of the cause of the dizziness of stationary. On the same day her husband canceled the trip and demanded cancellation of the travel insurer reimbursed. It refused to pay, since the illness of the wife already existed for a while. The husband brought attention to the action before the AG in Munich. The judge dismissed the claim, however:
The travel insurance should only pay if the trip due to an unexpected serious illness was unreasonable. This was done but the cancellation because the wife of another diagnosis had been stationary. A cancellation as a result of diagnosis performed but not covered under the insured risk. You know, just because the diagnosis has yet to be implemented, not yet, whether a disease exists. In addition, the disease would also, one should accept it, certainly not unexpected. The wife finally had since October 2006 to the attacks suffered from impotence and at 5.1.07, so even before the posting in medical treatment.
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)