A holidaymaker who was assaulted three times in just over a month while travelling has lost a dispute with his insurer after claiming for tens of thousands of dollars in expenses. 

The man said he was beaten and robbed in Fiji in July 2023, then attacked in San Francisco the same month and Los Angeles the next.

He lodged claims for the first two incidents, which insurer AWP Australia settled for $97,941.

The claimant had been due to return home on September 28 2023, but he cancelled his return ticket about September 18 to instead travel to South America.

The man later lodged another claim for expenses, including more than $100,000 for unused accommodation in the US, car hire, and travel and hotel costs in several South American countries, where he said he sought further treatment for his assault injuries.

He told the insurer a GP in Colombia stated he was medically unfit to fly long distances and would need further head scans and to see specialists.  

AWP declined to cover the additional costs and cancellation expenses, and challenged the suggestion the man could not fly home for medical reasons.

It says the traveller had tests at a hospital in San Francisco that ruled out any serious injury.  

AWP’s chief medical officer said the claimant’s reported injuries presented “no barrier to flying home”. They offered to consult with the man’s doctor, but the traveller refused.  

“There is nothing described that would cause an airline to not clear the individual for travel,” the medical officer said. “Even if he was suffering from post-concussion syndrome, which can potentially last for months or even longer, this does not contraindicate flying in a hyperbaric environment.”  

In a dispute ruling, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority says the man did not present persuasive medical reasoning for not flying home, noting his doctor’s report was based on conversations rather than examinations or tests.  

The authority also notes the claimant flew on his South America trip, which is a “serious impediment to his position”.

It says the man was fit to come back to Australia and the insurer’s offer of a cash settlement to return him from San Francisco to Sydney was fair.

It notes the man’s whereabouts were unknown at the time of the ruling.  

AWP should not have to cover the cost of the South America trip, because it was not required, AFCA’s panel says.  

“The panel accepts that the complainant has experienced symptoms following his assault. However, based on the available material, the panel is not satisfied the complainant had to travel to receive adequate treatment, or that his injuries required immediate treatment from a medical adviser at the time the additional expenses were incurred.”  

AFCA also notes the insurer’s investigator found no evidence for the existence of businesses said to be providing “glamping” accommodation and luxury vehicle costs – for which the complainant said he paid more than $130,000.

“Despite requests, no information has been provided to challenge the investigator’s findings such as bank statements showing the pre-paid accommodation, original booking confirmation from the provider, or written confirmation from the provider as to whether the complainant is entitled to a refund or credit for the unused booking,” the panel said.  

“On balance, the panel is satisfied that the insurer correctly applied the terms of the policy in considering the complainant’s claim for cancellation expenses.”  

Click here for the ruling.