Snapzzz wrote:Thanks Bandit, i understand your point.
How many 'off piste' accidents do you think are contested by insurers?
As far as i am concerned you are either covered or not and for an insurer to dispute on the grounds that going off piste 'is putting yourself at risk' really stinks. Especially when they state 'off piste' is covered.
Also Direct travel choose not to stipulate any specific conditions as many others do, such as having a qualified guide. So how could they argue about what is safe or unsafe? After all we are not qualified mountain rangers!
It is indeed a minefield.
I think any insurer will contest each claim, on piste or off, in an attempt to reduce costs. It's an adversarial system AFAICS. Most of the mainstream companies employ claims handling agencies who seem to be paid on results )
A friend was skiing with his son on piste this year, and the boy fell over and broke his leg, quite badly. He was airlifted to hospital. The boys' Mother was not impressed by her insurer telling her by phone her that the staff handling their case were having a meeting to decide how to proceed with the claim. This is your Insurer (and mine). How could any debate exist? Child, on piste, supervised by his Father, takes a fall, no-one else involved. The company had all this information to hand.
As far as the extra risk of going off piste, from an insurance perspective, they may consider that you don't have to go off piste, and you are not well equipped to be doing so (training and equipment wise). I spent ages in early 2010, on asking this company questions on these issues, and didn't really get a feeling that they knew much about off piste skiing in Europe.
