A traveller who sought cover after his wife missed her flight due to its early departure has lost his claims dispute following an Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) determination. 

The complainant’s wife was scheduled to fly from New York to Sydney on July 22 last year, and had checked in the night before. After she checked in, the flight’s departure time was pushed forward by two hours.

The woman says she did not receive notification of the earlier departure time and missed the flight because of it. She later purchased a ticket for a second flight on July 26 for $1096.

The claimant says the changed departure time was an “unforeseen and unexpected event” that should be covered by the travel policy.

Lloyd’s Australia declined the claim, saying its policy only covered flight disruptions if delays were longer than 12 hours. The insurer says its policy did not respond to missed flights due to early departures.

It also notes that the policy excluded losses caused by a travel carrier’s failure to provide advertised services.

The insured argues that the changed flight time should be considered a disruption that delayed her trip by over 12 hours as the next “reasonably priced” flight was only available on July 26.

He says the loss was out of his wife’s control, and it was reasonable to expect the policy to cover situations where flights are rescheduled without prior notification.

AFCA notes that the policy did not define “delay” and relied on a Macquarie dictionary’s explanation, which described the word as “to put off to a later time; defer; postpone”. 

It says under this definition, the circumstances of the loss could not be considered a “delay” coverable by the policy. 

“I am not satisfied, on balance, that the complainant’s flight being rescheduled to an earlier time is a delay under the policy,” AFCA said.

“Even if the reschedule to an earlier time could be considered a delay under the policy, which I do not consider it can, the delay must be for at least 12 hours to be covered.”

“The complainant’s flight time changed by two hours. As such the policy would not cover the claim on this basis.”

Click here for the ruling.