When insurers won't stand for sitting down
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A PASSENGER on the London Underground has had an insurance claim for the theft of his luggage rejected because he did not spend his 30-minute Tube journey standing up.
On 12 July Didier Chojnacki had a tiring flight from Barcelona. He had a heavy suitcase and was only too delighted to get a seat for his lengthy Tube journey from Heathrow airport to west London.
Mr Chojnacki put his suitcase in the area of the train designated for luggage. He sat down and kept a watchful eye on his case.
Suddenly the case disappeared. Mr Chojnacki immediately got off the train and reported the theft to the station supervisor. He also claimed on his travel insurance, bought at his branch of Barclays Bank. He had bought Barclays travel insurance many times before, but this was his first claim.
Mr Chojnacki said: 'The claim was in the region of pounds 1,000. There was nothing of great value in the case. The case was probably more expensive than the contents, which were mainly clothes.'
The loss adjusters turned down his claim. They said he did not show 'due care and attention for the safety and supervision of his bag'.
Mr Chojnacki wrote to say he had taken all reasonable steps. The loss adjusters were unmoved. He telephoned, but without success. 'I asked them for their definition of due care and attention. A rather rude assistant told me I should have been travelling standing up]
'I had put the case where it says 'luggage' and it was constantly in my direct line of vision. It is a long way from Heathrow to spend standing up next to a suitcase.'
We spoke to Barclays, who in turn spoke to Home & Overseas, the insurer. A Barclays spokesman said: 'Home & Overseas is sticking to the wording and their right to reject the claim.
'However, we are looking at it from a Barclays customer point of view. We will endeavour to help the customer and take it up with Home & Overseas. We are very hopeful we will be able to meet our customer's claim.'
There may yet be a happy ending to Mr Didier's story, but the problem of what is reasonable care remains.
The insurers argue that policyholders should act in the same way as if they were not insured. But what is reasonable to one company could be totally unreasonable to another.
A spokesman for the Association of British Insurers said: 'There is no actual definition of what is reasonable. It depends on other things around at the time. Whether it is reasonable to sit down on a Tube train would depend on such things as the time of day. If you are travelling at eight in the morning you may not be able to see a suitcase through a forest of legs. At eight at night it could be a different matter.
'It would also depend where you are sitting. If you are right down the other end of the carriage to the suitcase, then you would not have much chance of running after it.'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments