Who is unreasonable? Issue with older person travelling uninsured in Europe.

[shovetheholly]

I don't have a stake in this argument - I'm very much a bystander. Submitting it to the Mumsnet hive mind for consideration.

Adult 1 is older, (70) has a stent in his heart and mobility problems. He is awaiting surgery for the latter. He can still get out and about, however, and enjoys a fairly active retirement. He is decently well off and wants to travel. However, he is appalled at the cost of travel insurance. As a consequence, he is thinking of going abroad to Europe uninsured. His point of view is that the EHIC will limit the potential cost of any accident to around £10k and he can afford to pay this should something happen. He has a tendency to regard insurance as 'tempting fate' and insurance companies as a rip off.

Adult 2 is younger (44). He thinks Adult 1 is wrong that the cost of any treatment would be limited to £10k. He believes that the premium is higher because an accident or emergency is more likely, and that travel insurance ought to be bought to cover potential costs, particularly given that the price is affordable to Adult 1. Adult 2 is generally risk-averse and cautious with money.

Who, in your opinion, is right?

I suppose it depends on how much the insurance is. If he can't get it for less than £1,000 for example, then I wouldn't really blame him for taking the risk if he can afford to pay upfront should he need to. It's worth shopping around though. I think some bank accounts provide travel insurance cover even for those aged 70 (not sure if there are exclusions though)

Part of the weighting of the premium will be because he is awaiting an operation. So if he can wait until after he has it, then the premium should come down quite significantly . If he is thinking of a cruise, then most cruise lines require the details of the travel insurance policy so that they know they will get paid if you need to use the on board medical facilities.

Are there any actuaries on MN today/ do you know one? They might be able to explain the cost of insurance v risks to A1 in terms he might respect more.

Adult 1 is being a stubborn fool. He could get annual insurance cover from a specialist firm like Saga which will cost an awful lot less than the thousands that a hospital admission could cost. Travel insurance is very much a part of the cost of going abroad on holiday, especially if you have a health condition.

Insurance may not be less than a hospital admission if going to the EU and even if it is, there is a good chance that he won't need to pay hospitals costs whereas he will definitely have to pay insurance (if he takes it). I think he needs to get a more realistic idea of the maximum he could end up paying (including repatriation costs) and then work out whether he could really afford to pay it up front. He also needs to really shop around to find cheaper insurance.

I have a slight professional interest in this as have previously been responsible for medex and evac insurance for high risk individuals. The risk is not always the medical cover, it is the evacuation and repatriation. This is always provided by private service suppliers and can easily be in the £100ks. It is not covered by any intercountry agreement and is a purely private transaction. Without it you can easily be trapped in a foreign country, unable to travel and unable to access easy medical support. There is also a strong possibility that known conditions (e.g. Awaiting treatment etc) will not be covered by EHIC arrangements. I'd also him to consider receiving medical treatment without fully understanding the language etc as things like interpreters are generally the outcome of private insurance.

Basically, once you are an insurance companies problem they will move heaven and earth to get you back to the UK and into the NHS. Every day that passes is costing the. Money so they will actively seek to support you in order to limit their loss. It's a bit brutal but an economic reality. In my view you friend is absolutely crazy, bordering on the irresponsible to be even considering travel without insurance in his situation.

There is also a strong possibility that known conditions (e.g. Awaiting treatment etc) will not be covered by EHIC arrangements.

I thought that EHIC did cover preexisting conditions as long as you are not travelling to the country for treatment. As far as language is concerned and cost of treatment is concerned that would depend on where he is travelling wouldn't it? Also, If he was somewhere that offered state healthcare for free for those with EHIC then repatriation may not be an urgent issue. I think it has to be weighed up rather than assuming that insurance (if he can get it) is always the best option.

He is being incredibly selfish. I have seen first hand the effect that having insurance in place has. It's not just about paying the costs - it's also about liaising with the clinics and doctors, about treating you and getting you home. Repatriation can cost thousands if you need a medical professional to accompany you - and there are many airlines that simply won't fly you if you are seriously ill or injured unless you are accompanied.

Think about the travelling companions. In basic terms, they aren't going to have access to his cash. So what happens if he is unconscious or worse? Are they supposed to pony up their own credit cards and hope for the best? The aggravation and hassle is another factor; it's a huge ask to expect them to step up and deal with the medical care, language barrier and negotiate all of the ins and outs of what should happen and how the bill is going to be settled. There are plenty of hospitals which will refuse to treat you unless you have confirmed cover in place, or a verified ability to pay. The EHIC gives basic cover, and as PP have said what's 'basic' in other countries can differ wildly from what you can get on the NHS here.

I would refuse to travel with him.

Mary - I have a friend who was taken ill in Spain last year. Very popular tourist destination. The ER nurse spoke some English, the Doctor spoke none. They had to get a volunteer translator to help them.

Actually I think it depends....

EHIC covers emergency treatment at the level offered to the local population. So if he is going to visit relatives in Northern Europe where treatment is better than or equal to the NHS he will be fine. Hospital treatment is good and he or any carer could stay with relatives to recuperate.

If however he is travelling in rural Eastern Europe he might need to transfer to a private hospital to maximise his chances of survival. This will not be covered by his EHIC. Nor will additional accommodation costs for him and a carer.

He would also have to pay if he has to return home by ambulance or if he dies and his remains need to be repatriated.

He may have cover for permanent disablement, personal liability and legal costs on other policies - if not he should factor those into hos costs.

I think that some insurance companies demand hugely inflated premiums for the elderly - particularly those travelling in Northern Europe.

PaulDacresConscience Having been to Spain many times, that doesn't surprise me. In some other EU countries they will almost certainly speak English though. As I said, he needs to get all the facts and weigh everything up.

I think adult 1 simply hasn't thought this through properly or doesn't understand how EHIC works. Like others have said, it's going to be A LOT more than 10k to get brought home in an ambulane or god forbid have to be repatriated in case the worst happens.

That said, if he's got a pot of cash, could he not try to get a cheaper premium by agreeing to a huge excess? I feel that if he suggested a 10k excess to a broker that the premium would be reduced by quite a lot.

You could be writing about my MIL. She is exactly the same. Has a pacemaker and had cancer in the past, though was given the all clear 4 years ago now. Also some other medical conditions.

She refuses to pay for travel insurance as she says she can afford it if her suitcases go missing and seems to think the EHIC card is magic.

My biggest worry is if she were to either have a big medical emergency that needed hospital stays and repatriation, or even worse, what if she died and her body needed bringing back. She is on her own so DH and BIL would have a huge nightmare sorting out either one of those things.

If she had insurance, there would be someone on the end of a phone who could help arrange everything. Without it, where do you even start to arrange foreign medical care/bills/repatriation???

Up to individuals if they travel without adequate insurance, just as long as they (or their family) don't get to do sadface in the local or national rags when things go tits up.

For my medical condition I take out travel insurance that excludes medical expenses, cancellation or repatriation arising from my condition so could he do that as a compromise?

Some medical charities may offer discounted medical insurance to sufferers- I think a relative of mine gets insurance via this route. It is still expensive though.

If I were Adult 1's partner I would refuse to travel with him unless he had insurance.

Again I don't know the detail - so I can't be sure about this - but I think we're talking about the annual premium for travel insurance being something in the region of £1,000 not £10k. Adult 1 mentioned that it was 'almost as much as the accommodation' and is not known for splashing out on this.

Susan - your idea of a big excess is genius, and could really work! However, I wonder if such policies are available? Wouldn't most older people go for them if they were? Can anyone give me an expert opinion? I think Adult 1 would be more happy with a large excess (£10k) and a smaller policy amount.

NHS worker here, and another one who has seen first-hand the reason for ALWAYS having insurance when travelling. I have treated many patients who became suddenly unwell on holiday, requiring repatriation back to the UK. Without exception, not one patient or family regretted paying for their insurance - even if it was well into four figures. Similarly, I have worked with patients who had none and, in addition to the stress and trauma of having a critically ill loved-one, their families were dealing with multiple, unaffordable bills and regretting beyond anything else not having taken out insurance.

A pre-existing heart condition, plus mobility problems, plus his age, plus frequent flying increases exponentially his risk of stroke, by the way. No way of getting home easily after one of those without a monumental outlay of money. He's a fool.

Adult 1 is making a sensible decision as long as he is happy to see out any medical treatment in the country he is visiting. As people have rightly pointed out, it is medical repatriation which is expensive. If we are talking France and Germany then the quality of medical treatment will be excellent.

Petronius , in order to qualify for Saga's included travel insurance, you have to declare any pre-existing conditions and whether you are on a list for surgery. If they accept you, you pay extra. Adult 1 would probably not be accepted or would have to,pay a fortune.

A pre-existing heart condition, plus mobility problems, plus his age, plus frequent flying increases exponentially his risk of stroke, by the way.

And is the reason Premium would be so high.

The further background provided by OP paints a slightly different picture, if he's happy to lose everything he has then so be it. However, we're older than Adult 1 and holidays we're been on (including cruises) it's mandatory to have travel insurance.

If he does travel and needs medical help hospitals in some countries may require money in their back accounts before giving any but emergency treatment.

He isn't going on a cruise though and depending on where he is going healthcare may be very good and perhaps free with an EHIC card. He needs the facts before making his decision. I think that many of those who assume that travel insurance is always the best option whereever you are going and whatever the medical condition have little experience of trying to get travel insurance with a preexisting conditions.I have saved thousands and thousands of pounds over the years by not insuring my condition.

I have Diabetes Type 2, Asthma, Hypertension and I am 72. We have travel insurance included with our Natwest account. I had to pay them £140 to get these conditions covered world wide for a year. Excess £50.

Travel insurance would also cover his partner staying with him if he needed to be in hospital longer than their planned holiday.

My mum had an accident in India. She was transferred by air lift from one regional specialty hospital to a supra regional specialist hospital.

After 2 weeks she was then airlifted back to the UK. It required a 1st class seat (to accommodate the cage around her pelvis), plus a doctor and a nurse (she had a head injury as well so was highly confused). Dad had to travel separately as they couldn't get a seat for him on the same plane.

All of this was covered by insurance but must have cost £,000s. It's not just the cost of the hospital treatment, it's the cost of the extra hotel accommodation (like for my dad), the repatriation, the accompanying medics.....