The travellers had planned to fly from Vietnam to Mumbai, with a two-hour transit, before continuing on to Cairo.
However, they were prohibited from boarding the flight in Vietnam upon discovering that they did not possess the necessary transit visa for Mumbai. In response, the complainants arranged an alternative flight to Egypt via Oman.
The insured individuals claim that they were unaware of the visa requirement for transit in India and sought coverage for the additional flights, which they argue were a result of an unforeseen event.
Zurich, the insurer, declined the claim, stating that their policy did not cover errors or omissions in booking arrangements or failures to obtain relevant visas, passports, or travel documents.
The Australian Financial Complaints Authority agreed with Zurich, determining that the circumstances of the loss fell outside the policy's scope of cover due to the travellers' failure to obtain the required visa.
"I acknowledge that the complainants were not intending to visit India and had only planned for a transit through Mumbai," A.F.C.A commented. "While the visa requirement may have been unexpected from the complainant's perspective, I cannot agree that it was beyond their control for the purposes of this claim.
"The complainants had the option to arrange visas for their entire trip, including multiple destinations and/or transits."
Moreover, A.F.C.A acknowledged that even if the visa requirement was considered unexpected and "beyond the complainants' control," Zurich would still have had the right to decline the claim, as their policy excluded cover for failures to obtain the necessary visa.
