A traveller who returned early from a trip when her ex-husband died will not have her costs covered because the man was not considered a “close relative”.    

The woman, who came home to support her family, sought cover for extra travel costs and resuming her holiday, but Nib Travel Services (Australia) rejected her claim. 

The policyholder took her case to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, arguing she maintained regular connections with her ex-husband regarding family matters, lived near him and shared four children with him.

AFCA’s ombudsman acknowledges that connection but says it does not satisfy the policy’s definition of a close relative – a family member with a blood, marriage or de-facto link.  

The policy stated: “It means a spouse, de-facto partner, parent, parent-in-law, daughter, son, daughter-in-law, son-in-law, brother, sister, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, niece, nephew, grandchildren, grandparent, stepparent, stepchildren, fiance or fiancee, or legal guardian.”  

AFCA notes the complainant was not listed under “marriages” on the ex-husband’s death certificate and says Nib was entitled to decline the claim.  

“I accept the complainants have acted reasonably in the circumstances given the close connections between [the complainant] and [her ex-husband],” the ombudsman said.  

“Further, I acknowledge their arguments and that they maintained a close relationship ... However, the scope of the policy definition is clear to only include immediate family.”  

Click here for the ruling.

From the latest Insurance News magazine: The challenges facing the next federal government, and the industry's plan to tackle them