this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
385 points (98.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43963 readers
1313 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Wanderer@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Travel insurance is my big one. Why would you not get that? That seems like such a stupid risk not to get that.

Like if I get hit by a car in the middle of nowhere and they got to fly my home because the medical care there sucks. That's going to cost an absolute fortune. Even having to send my dead body home will cost my family loads.

[โ€“] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why would you not get that? That seems like such a stupid risk not to get that.

Pretty much for all the reasons I said in my comment - you'll almost certainly spend more on premiums for travel insurance than you'll ever claim (this is true of all insurance) and the expenses incurred by self-insuring are generally manageable. Even in the two situations you refer to, we're "only" talking about costs of a few thousand, and both of those are highly unlikely events that most people go their whole lives not dealing with. you're much better off putting the money you'd spend on that travel insurance into an emergency fund to cover those kinds of unexpected expenses.

Insurance is only a good financial call if you risk completely bankrupting yourself by not having insurance, otherwise you're just trading potential lump sum costs for small continuous costs, and the premiums will generally always wind up being more than what you're saving (because if they weren't, then the Insurance companies wouldn't be making so much money).

That being said, it's your money, if you'd rather accept that you're paying more over a lifetime on travel insurance than you're saving just to have the peace of mind that you won't have to dip into savings for any incident that happens before or during the trip (assuming your incident doesn't fall under one of the many carefully crafted exclusions that the insurance companies add to their policies to prevent paying out, which it probably will), then by all means, buy it - but if you're buying it because you think it's the financially savy move, and you have at least a few grand in your bank account for emergencies, then you're kidding yourself.

I just read a news article this week about a young Australian man on vacation in Indonesia who got in an accident. His family now face costs of around $350,000 because his insurance didn't cover riding motorized scooters.

I think travel insurance is generally wise to have, and to be aware of what you are covered for. This is an example both of the potential costs and how if you don't read your policy carefully they will fuck you over.

[โ€“] ElHexo@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

When you say travel insurance, are you thinking of overseas medical expenses?

I cut my foot on some rocks in the US and that insurance claim paid for all the previous travel insurance I'd taken out previously.

[โ€“] Wanderer@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

you'll almost certainly spend more on premiums for travel insurance than you'll ever claim (this is true of all insurance)

Yes I agree but it's about how you value risk. Losing $100 on travel insurance is better than losing $1,000,000 on hospital bills. The risk is different obviously but I'm not worried about $100 for peace of mind. I have even gone to war zones were my insurance was invalid but I had it in safer places because it's all about risk.

Even in the two situations you refer to, we're "only" talking about costs of a few thousand, and both of those are highly unlikely events

That's just where your wrong and there is no point continuing this discussion. You don't think people have to pay a fortune for medical cover when you have no insurance? Sure some countries might cover that and their might be mutual care agreements. But not having insurance in a place that won't pay your hospital bills. That's madness. Your argument works if you artificially make up costs sure.

I have personally know loads of people to get in accidents when travelling, I have myself. I have only heard one person being hospitalised and getting sent home but it happens and it isn't cheap.

[โ€“] rifugee@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the main point is that the policies have so many exclusions in the fine print that you are unlikely to get them to pay even if something does happen. That seems pretty scammy to me. But I guess there is something to be said for the peace of mind you get when you buy it, eh? Even if it's unfounded.

[โ€“] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Yup - this is exactly it. I'm entirely certain that there are people out there who have had their financial lives saved from utter ruin via vacation insurance - but I'm also certain (because I've witnessed it myself) that far far more people who think they should be covered wind up in deep shit because their hospitalization came from an accident, or as the result of a crime, or some other edge case that happens to be excluded by the travel insurance policy (and make no mistake, these exclusions are carefully crafted to cover as many potential cases as humanly possible while still sounds decent on paper).

[โ€“] bitsplease@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

And you would be entirely correct - if insurance companies acted in good faith, the reality however, is that they don't. Your comments are already littered with replies of people giving you examples that they've personally experienced of carefully constructed exclusions meaning that they can't actually claim their policy.

I have no doubt that there are people out there for whom travel insurance has saved their ass, but I know from my own experience in the industry that the far more common experience for policy holders is to wind up with the insurance company finding a reason to not pay up, and now you're left both with the cost of the emergency, as well as the cost of the policy.

Like I said, it's your money, and I'm certainly not going to give a shit if you keep buying travel insurance policies, hell - people buying insurance policies pay my salary (though i don't work in travel insurance any longer)

[โ€“] thecodeboss@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I got travel insurance recently for a hiking trip with my wife. We had an emergency and my wife had to be airlifted out by helicopter, and we were so glad to have the travel insurance because it covers emergency evacuation up to $10,000 (and the helicopter costed around $5,000). Awesome, right?

Well... actually no. Turns out, the terms of our policy dictate we needed to call insurance first and have them organize the airlift. Since we dialed 911 and organized the helicopter ourselves, our insurance won't cover it. I guess it's my fault for not reading the fine print, but it feels pretty scummy from the insurance company. Even if we had read the fine print, in the moment I don't think I would have remembered as my immediate instinct is to contact emergency services.