UKC

I am looking into Travel Insurance for my wife that covers cycle touring for trips of 40 days plus and am deep into the area of terms and conditions.

Whilst reading the Ts and Cs for LV I read this 

Adventure activities (Premier cover only)
With our Premier cover, you’re also covered to do the following activities while on a trip. There is no cover under this policy for any sporting activity where money is paid to you to take part, or for any kind of manual work.
[............................] Rock climbing if qualified or fully supervised by a person experienced in this activity, and wearing a helmet

https://lv-travel.co.uk/i/themes/lvtravel/static/prem_adventure_activities_...

So I rang LV and asked what they meant by "qualified"
And the Lady was a little taken a back, but soon gathered her thoughts and said with an Instructor or suitably experienced.

So I said, well I have been Rock Climbing for 20 years but have no formal qualifications.

She said then you are an experienced person and would be covered.

What do you think?

I'd get that in writing if I were you.

This is why I've always used BMC for trips, you know you're actually covered for rock climbing and there aren't going to be any ambiguous wiggle out clauses hidden in the Ts&Cs like this.

Do you hold any qualifications in rock climbing? 

I do feel being sarcastic is pretty tedious, but feel that in the light of your username, it is appropriate to ask if you have read the OP?

In the UK, qualification and competency can be demonstrated by 3 methods:

1- Experience
2- Holding a NGB award
3- Written clarification/ statement from an appropriate (i.e. recognised qualified) individual

From your account above it would appear that you meet criteria 1, therefore yes you are qualified to go rock climbing.

As has also been said above, BMC travel insurance for rock climbing is the way to go.

Jez
(Qualified rock climber and instructor)

Meh, rely on the conversation you had with the lady on the phone and take out the insurance, what's the worst that could happen. Definitely don't clarify it in writing or look for more suitable cover (although, reading your op, I don't think it matters one bit whether you're a qualified rock climber when what you want is "Travel Insurance for my wife that covers cycle touring"). 

Always go with a specialist for sport insurance, i used to be with BMC on an annual policy but they just kept racking the price up with no justification, i just use Snowcard now.

I had experience of trying to get life cover from one of the high street insurers, it was without a doubt the funniest and most harrowing experience i had in a long while, some of the questions and trying to clarify what ski touring or running in the mountains involved were particularly taxing, i had them telling me if i went over 3000M in summer regardless of activity then it was mountaineering, if i climbed inside it wasn't climbing, but if i used bolted climbing outside it was climbing and a whole host of other weirdness about height of climbs etc, i gave up after an hour on the phone being probed and generally confused.

Yes, I've given up more than once when we got to the discussion about how high I was planning to climb, and it becoming clear they didn't mean altitude above sea level...

Now that is interesting, I do qualify on point 1, but I joined a club and I was Proposed and Seconded in writing by two people who attested to my competency and 4 other people also signed to say what a jolly fine chap I am, I wonder I that would cover 3.

Personally I am not a fan of BMC insurance but take your point.

Would a time and date of call not suffice, along with my written notes taken at the time.

Happy to be corrected, as it is a while since I’ve been taught this stuff. But surely this list is options for certifying competency. You’re only qualified if you hold a qualification.

My understanding is this list is often quoted because, under UK law, for many things like instructing climbing you only have to be suitably competent, not qualified. Whereas the badly worded insurance Ts and Cs of the OP specifically refer to qualification of the policy holder (or supervision by someone experienced). Taken literally the policy does not cover individuals whom themselves are competent/experienced but not qualified.

This was my take, but the representative of the insurance company said different.
Also its a rainy day.

Well, just to say we used LV for all our travel insurance when living in the U.K. and did this because their response was so good when we needed them, including after a skiing accident in France and also other health issues abroad. They were not the cheapest but we felt they were worth it. 

But we still later took out membership of AAC(UK) for its insurance just in case.

Maybe? I've heard plenty of horror stories about travel insurance companies, and ones that provide "extreme" sports cover in particular. Obviously you're hoping you never need it, but in case you do providing them with as few options as possible to wriggle out of a potentially very expensive claim seems prudent.

Although that's not the dictionary definition of qualified.

The wording doesn't specifically refer to qualification. Also if qualified is meant to equal qualification then the wording would make less sense? - Covered if you hold some qualification or alternatively supervised by someone who is experienced (but doesn't need a qualification).  

You could say you are experienced but qualify this by saying you don't like getting cold or leading in the rain.

I was involved in advising government at the inception of the Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations in the 90's. (I even had my name in Hansard at one point).

With respect to the activities covered by the regulations (of which outdoor rock-climbing is definitely one)  I think you'll find that competence to instruct is expected to be measured by something more than just self-attested experience.  Holding the relevant NGB Award (together with on-going experience at that level) is obviously one acceptable measure of competence. Another acceptable measure is an assessment of competence - whether that be through a judgement of the person's experience or an "in-house" assessment, or both - by a "technical expert". For activities with NGB Awards "technical expert" is normally defined as someone holding the qualification recognised by the NGB as appropriate to assess the relevant NGB qualification. So for single pitch rock climbing a technical expert is an MIA/MCI holder, not SPA/RCI. This second route is especially relevant where the activity is limited, for example, to a specific venue.

This only has any legal force in relation to providers of adventure activities to children for payment. But in that context it has held it's validity now for more than 25 years. Obviously you don't need any assessed qualification or experience just to go climbing - and the BMC will continue, I hope, to protect that right. But if you need to "prove" your competence to someone, eg an insurance company, then it's probably as good a guide as any.  It's good that, through the BMC, we can get insurance that covers us without any conditions as to competence, but that does limit the insurer's wriggle room in the event of an expensive claim, which might be why BMC insurance is relatively expensive.

The 2004 Guidance to the Adventure Licensing Regulations is still current on the HSE website at https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l77.pdf, obviously allowing for the subsequent updating of the names of some of the NGBs and their qualifications.

Martin

Tell them you're qualified by merit of having watched the film "Fall",  twice.

Yes that is implausible maybe not even mentally possible to endure twice but they're an insurance company and won't know better

Well the worst that could happen is they have an accident and the insurance doesn't cover them because they are not "qualified". The verbal opinion of a member of staff is worthless unless it's confirmed in writing.

"Qualified" in its normal sense means holding formal qualifications having successfully completed a period of formal training and been assessed. If the insurers had meant "experienced" they could have said so.

Personally I wouldn't rely on either the telephone call or UKCers' opinions (including mine), I'd want to go with a specialist insurer who understands the activities you will be undertaking.

Is it? I would say that it is a contract.

Last year in preparation for what would be an exceptional year of travel I upgraded my Sportscover Direct Policy which covers me for Rock Climbing and Cycle Touring to Worldwide Except US and for 60 days trips. £180.00

I have just returned from an 8 week wander around India where I wandered into Nepal, and set off to trek up Himchal Mardi. Because I am a small print reader, I checked I was covered, and I was not, only up to 2500mtrs in Nepal. Because I was there I had to take additional cover with Sportscover, which cost £100, which was a bitter pill, but as the sentiment of your post suggests, not as bitter as being uninsured could be.

LV cover you to 6000 mtrs and for cycling except BMX and MTB, so touring is covered and for 90 day trips.

I am wondering if because BMC, Snowcard, Sportscover cater to a certain crowd, they get more claims, but also they play on the fear of not having "the right" cover, to screw extra money out of people.

My Sportscover IIRC does not cover mountaineering, now when does Multi Pitch Rock Climbing become Mountaineering, to most people the Vajolet Towers or the Puig are mountains. And with LV we are speaking of a highly regarded insurer.

This is non-specialist cover and they don't know what they are talking about (as exemplified by what happened when you enquired about something pretty basic). I once had a similar policy which specified that climbing was covered "up to 4000m", I phoned up to ask if this was up to 4000m altitude above sea level or if it was rock faces that were up to 4000m tall from bottom to top. I was told over the phone that it was the latter. I.e. They didn't know what they were talking about.

Funny as all this is, you might end up relying on that insurance. When I was young and foolish, I just bought the insurance and thought "har har, joke's on you insurance company" as I spent the next 6 months climbing. But now that I'm an old man I recognise that if a big claim comes in and the insurance company realise what sort of activity you were actually doing, they'll try very hard to wriggle out of it and whether or not the T and Cs clearly cover you, you could well end up not getting a payout.

If you buy AACUK or BMC insurance then you have a policy you can actually rely on.

OP you've asked a couple of different questions...

1. No, you are not a qualified rock climber

2. Yes, your wife will be insured if climbing with you as you are experienced in this activity.

Your call to LV will  have been recorded so make a note of the time and date for future reference if needed.

Lying broken in a hospital abroad and finding your insurer won't pay your repatriation costs would be a pretty bad outcome. I know of someone who came home from Greece on a chartered jet because due to injuries he could not be carried on a commercial flight. That didn't come cheap.

The sales staff won't know, they aren't climbers or lawyers, but if it all goes pear shaped and ends up in court, the insurance company will appoint a barrister who will in turn hire a mic or guide as an expert witness and you'll be proven to be unqualified, experience is irrelevant. 

The 'certain crowd' snowcard and BMC cater for in your example are people who like to be sure they have appropriate travel insurance. LV, allthough are are reputable company may or may not insure you for climbing and mountaineering (as others have said, and from my own experience they dont have a clue and you are basically rolling the dice) and any claim may or may not end up in court. If you have the cash for some good lawyers than crack on. The resulting legal battle may (or may not) result in cheaper insurance for the rest of us. If not then purchaseing a policy where the wording is clear may seem prudent.

Well, if you have to ask…

Based on my experience their house insurance, I’d suggest placing your confidence in LV is foolish, if you have sense, you won’t do this.

"We're very sorry, but due to a technical fault, we do not have the recording of that conversation."

Always get it in writing. Never rely on an insurance company to retrospectively supply you with evidence to support your claim against them. 

A contract which you do not have any evidence of. You would want to rely on more than your word against an insurance company's to prove whether or not you were covered for a potentially very expensive claim.

And you definitely wouldn't want to be trying to prove whether there was a contract when you were in a foreign hospital in agonising pain and you find out the insurance company aren't interested in covering your treatment, rescue, or repatriation costs.