A couple forced to isolate for part of their trip to Antarctica following a covid diagnosis have lost their claims dispute after an Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) decision found that they did not suffer any financial losses. 

The complainant and his partner tested positive for coronavirus while on a cruise from Ushuaia, Argentina, to the Antarctic Peninsula on November 20, causing them to miss out on expeditions while they were in isolation for five days.

The couple took part in one expedition after they were released from isolation but could not land on shore due to poor weather conditions.

The claimant argued that the trip was “essentially cancelled” due to the diagnosis, outlining that the sole purpose of the trip was to take part in an onshore exploration of Antarctica. He sought a $40,000 refund for his losses under the policy’s cancellation limit option.

NIB Travel Services (Australia) declined the claim, saying that the trip was not cancelled and that the disruptions they suffered were non-financial losses and fell under the policy’s “loss of enjoyment” exclusion.

The insured argues that the claim should be assessed under clause 1 of the travel policy, which stipulates that the insurer would pay a “non-refundable portion of your pre-paid travel arrangements” if a trip is cancelled due to a coronavirus diagnosis. 

AFCA accepted that the trip had only been partially cancelled, and it would not be fair for the insurer to cover the entirety of the loss. However, it disagreed with the insurer’s assessment of the exclusion, saying that the complainant’s inability to participate in the expeditions was due to the induced isolation.

The ruling notes that the policy held defined benefits for “Coronavirus travel costs”, which would have limited any potential losses by the claimant to a maximum amount of $5000 if they had successfully established a claim. 

AFCA also shot down the complainant’s cover application for “serious illness”, saying that the benefit only applied if the policyholder was unable to “start or finish their trip”.

“The outcome is fair because the complainant has not shown that he has suffered any financial loss because of his cancellation of part of his trip following his diagnosis with coronavirus,” AFCA said.

“The complainant has not shown that he has incurred coronavirus travel costs that are covered by the policy.”

Click here for the ruling.