 Poster: A snowHead
|
I have been using the same insurance provider for the last 8yrs or so that covers me and my wife for multiple worldwide travelling throughout the policy year as well as winter sports cover that includes search and rescue and off-piste skiing/boarding.
Now, I have never really thought of scrutinizing the terms and conditions of the winter sports and especially the off-piste cover until now. I decided to telephone my insurance provider to find out if there were any "catch all" clauses when it comes to covering me should I have an accident or get caught in an avalanche whilst skiing off-piste / backcountry to which they replied that: "they would cover me as long as I don't place myself in danger or go into any area of danger"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
The way I see it is that it doesn't matter any which way you want to break it down, if someone decides to venture off-piste or into the backcountry even if you are super experienced and with a mountain guide they are, by default, potentially placing themself in danger because they will be entering a potentially dangerous area. If that is the case then that leads me to believe that they will never pay out should I get injured and need rescuing or caught in an avalanche whilst skiing off-piste.
Can anyone shed any light on this for me, please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Hornster, caveat first - I'm not an insurance expert.
I would have thought that if the policy says it covers you for off-piste, then to refuse a claim they would have to show you put yourself at particular danger, e.g. skiing while the avalanche risk is raised (say 3 or above), or venturing onto a glacier without a qualified local guide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I would interpret that as don't go off piste when there is a high avalanche risk, or if a 'closed' area, or advised against by an official. I wouldn't say off piste is a 'dangerous area' per se.
And as cover specifies off piste, they accept that risk in general, you'd have to do something OTT to not be covered, which is probably the case for most insurance anyway.
But if in doubt, contact them again and ask for clarification. It's them that will/won't pay, not us 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
laundryman, martinm, thanks for the feedback.
I have always thought along those lines but was left slightly confused when I telephoned my insurance provider. I suppose that it would have helped if the person I spoke to was a skier or boarder because at least then they would have known what off-piste is. When I asked her what the policy definition is of off-piste she replied with, "how am I suppose to know..I don't ski".
Anyway, thanks again for the quick replies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Hornster, there was a case recently of a UK snowboarder (I think) who died in an avalanche while off-piste in Tignes, where the insurance company refused to pay out because they argued that he'd taken an excessive risk in going off piste (despite being covered). There was some discussion on here, but I can't find it now. From memory, the company argued that avalanche level 3 was excessive...but I think they were challenged in the courts. Don't know the outcome.
Anyway, it's a tricky subject - in theory going skiing at all (even on piste) is placing yourself in danger, but then so is crossing the road. As laundryman says, I'd bet you can't insure someone for off-piste skiing and then claim it's too dangerous without good reason...but avy level 3 might be reason enough (which is the level most resorts spend most of the time at).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
ChrisWo, Thanks. I'll try and search for the discussion thread you have referred to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My close friend's son had a ski accident earlier in the year. He was an instructor doing a season in Canada and had taken out what he thought was full insurance. He had insurance for snow parks but after having a bad fall after jumping in the park his insurance company refused to pay. He was in intensive care and had to be flown home accompanied by a doctor and nurse. The policy covered off-piste and snowpark but had some sort of 'putting yourself at risk' clause and they refused to pay out. He had a qualification to teach in snowparks but it was his last day of his stay and therefore no longer working so could not claim through his employer's policy. Frankly it was a nightmare. It's wise to thoroughly check policies, especially with ambiguous wording.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
It's wise to thoroughly check policies, especially with ambiguous wording.
|
which is why, on my search for suitable insurance, I discarded Dogtag. Hopeless trying to get any sense out of them as to what offpiste cover they provide (in a European context). Nobody I spoke to there was a skier, and although they promised to get an authoritative view from underwriters for me, they never did. They kept using the "skiing against local advice" wording. When asked to clarify they said if, for example, there were avalanche warnings. I said there were always avalanche warnings, basically - though the level might be only 1, or 2. "Oh no," she said, "if there's any level of avalanche warning you wouldn't be covered". I gave up after about a week of that sort of nonsense.
If in doubt about the coverage of your UK policy for off piste, get Carte/Carré Neige.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
pam w, that's interesting - we've just noticed very similar wording has appeared in our policy this year (DirectTravel). It's making my OH question whether we should switch to someone less ambiguous. I might try giving them a call and see if I get a better response.
Out of interest, who did you end up choosing, or did you go Carte Neige?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisWo, I don't think it is particularly ambiguous.
What makes it so is trying to get sensible answers out of people on the phone. The majority of teh people you talk to will not be skiers or boarders themselves, and won't really know what you are talking about.
If in doubt, you need to write to them, and get written answers, preferably ones from somebody who actually understands the issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
alex_heney, I think you're right...writing is the way to go, and in fact it's probably not even worth calling as the answer will be misleading.
As for the ambiguity, I think it's in the eye of the beholder. I didn't read it as particularly problematic, but now I've thought a bit about it I see that it could easily be used by the insurer to avoid paying out on the general principle that the avalanche risk was 'too high'. I don't think that's what they really mean...but I can't tell for sure (which would be that ambiguousnessity...).
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
ChrisWo, After reading your post got my Direct Travel Insurance out to read again but cannot find the bit about avalanche risk was too high. Could you give me the page number .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
To be honest and having come from many years of mountaineering, I have decided to buy my off-piste ski insurance through the British Mountaineering Council as their all insurance policies are second to none from my experience. I was involved in a high altitude rescue high up on a 7000m mountain and they never hestitated in paying out. Pity I never thought of buying their insurance for my off-piste skiing also - doh!
here is their link to their insurance policies if anyone is interested. The Alpine & Ski policy is fantastic by all accounts.
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/modules/insurance/Policies.aspx#alpine
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
riverman, it doesn't refer to avalanche risk being too high - it has wording similar to pam w's policy, talking about local authority warnings (which may or may not refer to avalanche risk...I have no idea). Anyway, the wording is here:
http://www.direct-travel.co.uk/documents/current-policy-wording.pdf at the top of Adobe's page 17 (para A).
Like I said, I think it's been updated this year, so it may not be in your current policy wording.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
pam w, excuse my ignorance but how does the Carte Neige work and are there any "catch all" clauses?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
ChrisWo, In my (current) copy, it is on page 15 of the pdf.
The actual wording is that [cover is excluded for] "skiing against local authority warning or advice".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
alex_heney, does the policy T&C's give examples or define what "local authority warnings" are? Would that constitute a level 1,2,3,4 or 5 avalanche rating?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Hornster, They don't define that term, no.
IMO (and it is only my opinion), it would mean avalanche warning level 3 or higher, given that the official text for level 2 is "Alarm level 2
Moderate. An avalanche is likely to be triggered in the event of high levels of additional stress especially on the specified steep slopes. Favourable touring conditions if local danger zones are taken into consideration".
If level 2 then skiing on the "specified slopes" would also be excluded.
I think it can hardly be "against local authority warning or advice" when the official text says "Favourable touring conditions".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
alex_heney, if I were a mean insurance company, I think I'd be asking you if you were touring or not. If not, then I'd still think about claiming you were skiing against local authority advice...
[Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting insurance companies would really do that...well, not all of them  ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
In my experience, if there is any fresh snow to be enjoyed the avalanche risk will be at least 3 on the European scale. There are so many factors to take into account (angle and aspect of slope etc) that I cannot see any point in writing to an insurance company with "what if" questions. I'm insured with Direct Travel and would not ski down a closed piste because that is clearly "against local authority advice". But there are many "warning" notices at the top of mountains about the risks involved that cannot be taken as prohibiting access or invalidating insurance.
The only sure way to find out how your insurance company will behave is to make a claim, but obviously we should all study our policies carefully. What amazes me is that so many (30% I think I read recently) British skiers don't have any travel insurance at all. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apologies for duplicate post....I just wrote this in the other insurance thread that is live, but worth putting here too:
Don't panic too much....your E111 card number thing covers the vast majority of your medical bills.
It paid 99% of my medical costs when I broke my leg in Switzerland in April.
Also covered a decent % of the Heli rescue and Pisteurs.
Lift pass insurance paid the rest and all the holiday insurance covered was the car hire extension and rearranged flights.
The medical costs were the big number....even if we had no other insurance the rest was not too bad really.
In Switz' you can buy an Air Glaciers annual policy for about 30chf which will cover you for heli rescue anywhere, any reason (off piste, hiking, car accident...whatever).
Combine that with E111 and you have the vast majority of your finacial risk covered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hornster, I took the top level AMEX cover - very long trip lengths, and off-piste (not that I do much of that, but you never know). But I also - just today - bought the season Carré Neige - yes, it's belt and braces. But it's not too expensive and I'd rather have too much insurance than too little.
I don't think your E111 (ehic) will pay any of your "get off the mountain" bills in France.
My experience of writing to insurance companies is not encouraging - your chances of a proper substantive reply seem to be just about zero.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Jehu wrote: |
| there are many "warning" notices at the top of mountains about the risks involved that cannot be taken as prohibiting access or invalidating insurance. |
You reckon?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pam w, I am also insured with AMEX as it goes and it was them who gave me all sorts of "catch all" clauses in their policy T&C's that got me worried. So, I have decided to buy a second insurance policy (specifically for my ski trips) with the BMC whom I know from experience (mountaineering that is) are brilliant at paying out when the proverbial hits the fan.
Out of interest, how much would a 6 day Carré Neige cost in France?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Hornster, it costs 15€ here, though it's Assur' 2Alpes rather than Carré Neige.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Lizzard, I'm going to Morzine, what do they refer to it as?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hornster, no idea. Hardly matters though, as it's all broadly similar stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Our season Carré Neige ("Loisir" so in theory includes repatriation to the UK) was 97 euros for the two of us. If bought with a lift pass here, for shorter periods, the Carte Neige is 2 euros a day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
When I checked on renewing with Direct Travel they stated fully covered off piste unless specifically advised not to due to high avalanche risk etc.
A friend had to claim from them (not a ski trip) and was in ICU in Spain (expensive health care) and cover actually ran out as was still there in hospital and they paid up and sorted stuff with no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
unless specifically advised not to due to high avalanche risk etc.
|
Hmm. What's "high" risk mean in that context?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Here's a headscratching one from Insureforall.com
"Cover for off-piste skiing/snow boarding is restricted within resort boundaries or with a qualified guide. There is no cover for search and rescue."
So if I am within resort boundaries on my own or outwith with a guide and require to be evacuated by sledge or helicopter, do they refuse a claim because I had to be "rescued"? I think I know what is actually meant - ie Search & Rescue in terms of having to mount a search operation for someone actually lost, but it looks like a potential get out clause without a clear definition of what search and rescue is meant to mean.
The more I search for what I need, the more confusing it all gets.  And it doesn't help to be looking for insurance for 65+ when I haven't quite reached the stage of being content just to cruise the blues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
and there are no such things as "resort boundaries" in Europe, anyway, as far as I know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| rungsp wrote: |
| Don't panic too much....your E111 card number thing covers the vast majority of your medical bills. |
Not necessarily & not if the only medical centre in resort is private. We had to spend £1,000 at the resort medical centre (Austria), which we successfully claimed back on insurance but which was not covered by EHIC card. Only the hospital costs were covered by EHIC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
This thread had me worried about using dogtag so I had a conversation with them and it seems I need to pay attention to the avalanche bulletins.
If the bulletins say steep northwest slopes above 2300m have a dodgy layer then I should not go off piste in that area. It seems I basically must been seen to have taken "advise" from the resort when going off piste and practice safe riding techniques.
They are sending this to me in writing.
Im happy with that as this seems quite sensible.
My question is what does carte neige say in this circumstance? If I go on a northwest steep slope on a high (3 or above) against specific warnings on the bulitin, will carte neige not cover me, or is carte neige basically "do what the hell stupid thing you like we will foot the bill" inclusive policy?
Tux
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Hornster, by not putting yourself in danger the insurers will be looking to see that you did not go out off piste beyond your experience which in the event of a claim you will have to prove, or against advice and again this will be checked. Skiing off piste always carries an element of danger (on piste is also dangerous to be honest) your insurers will look to you tp prove that your were capable and conditions were appropriate. Very subjective and in the event of a claim it will be up to you to prove that you had taken adequate precautions before you went out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have annual Direct-Travel cover, just renewed and emailed them for clarification on "that" iffy exclusion statement. The reply has left us so concerned about the ambiguity in the policy and the lack of understanding on the part of the insurer, that we have purchased Air Glaciers cover in addition.
The phrase "skiing against local authority warning or advice"
I asked "Who is the "local authority" in this instance"?
| Quote: |
If an area has been deemed unsafe to ski in and there are written warnings in place by whoever is in charge, be it lift operators, ski instructors or any other person employed within the resort (local people who are in an authorised position) then you do not ski in that area until such time that it has been opened and any such bans have been lifted. If you were to ski in such an area where warnings were in place, you would not be covered if you had an accident or for example started an avalanche. A common sense approach to all travel plans and activities is essential at all times.
|
For us, there seemed to be an expectation on their part that "someone" is in charge of the mountains in Europe. We were also quite concerned that their representative was of the opinion that a ski instructor would be suitably qualified to open a ski area. Additionally, many of the places we ski, have "Beyond this marker at your own risk" signs, because they are outside the area managed by the lift company, which could be seen as a written warning by an insurer. They also seem to have an expectation that we are all going to be in a resort, which is in conflict with the off piste and ski touring elements within their policy.
It's a real shame, IMV Direct-Travel had one of the most commonsense approaches and affordable policies out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tuxpoo, interesting. What did they have to say about the general warnings? e.g. a yellow and black checkered flag. Just because there was a warning that lee slopes were particularly unstable it wouldn't mean the rest were necessarily safe, would it? When I asked I was told that I would not be covered if the local area had posted any avalanche warnings - and although I pointed out that there was practically always some kind of warning, because I was not talking to a skier I didn't get anywhere.
As far as I can make out, you are covered for accidents off piste with Carré Neige unless you are suicidal, drunk, pregnant or all three. http://www.carreneige.com/telechargements.php
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Sat 2-01-10 21:50; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
