How Prompted reviews an insurance policy against the needs of a trip

A travel insurance policy is not good or bad in the abstract. It is a set of promises with conditions attached, and whether those promises fit depends on the trip. Prompted reviews every policy against the needs of a specific type of trip: who is travelling, where, when, for how long, and what they will actually be doing. This page explains how those needs are built, how every claim reason a traveller might realistically bring is reviewed, how frequency and severity decide which of them are surfaced, and why lower-ranked items and constraints are reported only where a policy is an outlier. It is general information about method, not a personal recommendation.

1. Rigour first: every claim reason is reviewed, every time

Prioritisation only works if it sits on top of a complete review. Every policy is read against the same standing inventory of claim reasons, in full, for every trip. Nothing is skipped because it looks unlikely. Within each family, the review reads past the benefit limit to the definitions, triggers, conditions, exclusions and inner limits that decide whether the limit is ever reached.

Cancellation before departure. Which causes trigger cover (illness, injury, death, jury service, redundancy, home emergency, armed forces recall), whose illness counts (insured person, close relative, travelling companion, person the trip is being spent with), how "close relative" is defined, whether unused pre-booked costs such as excursions, parking and car hire are recoverable, whether deposits alone are covered, and the notification time bar.
Curtailment and early return. Whether payment is pro rata on unused days or from the date of return, whether additional travel costs home are included, whether one traveller returning early affects the rest of the party, and whether a non-travelling relative's illness at home is a trigger.
Emergency medical and repatriation. Pre-authorisation conditions, whether private treatment is covered only where state care is unavailable or unsuitable, in-patient benefit, dental and optical sub-limits, ambulance and mountain rescue, escort and hospital visit costs, repatriation, and the excess structure that applies per person per section.
Travel disruption. Delay bands and the point at which a payment starts, abandonment after a stated number of hours, missed departure and the causes it accepts, connection cover, and the treatment of industrial action.
Provider failure. Whether scheduled airline failure and end supplier failure are included as standard, offered as a named extension, or excluded, and how the wording interacts with ATOL and ABTA protection.
Baggage, gadgets, money and documents. Single-item and valuables limits, whether gadgets sit inside the baggage section or require a separate extension, the unattended property exclusion, deduction for wear against new-for-old settlement, police reporting conditions and their time limits, cash limits and passport replacement.
Personal liability and legal expenses. The limit, exclusions for property in the insured's care, custody or control, exclusions for motor vehicles and watercraft, and whether liability arising from children in the party is treated differently.
Activity and conduct conditions. The standard activity list and its tiers, the alcohol and reasonable care exclusions, and whether liability and medical cover survive an activity that is otherwise permitted.
Eligibility and disclosure. UK residency, age bands, trip length caps, business travel, the medical declaration process, and the treatment of travel undertaken against government advice.

The inventory is deliberately wider than the risks any one trip will trigger. What changes between trips is not how much is read, but which findings carry weight and which reach the customer.

2. Turning the inventory into the needs of a trip type

Each trip is classified against the core risk profile (who, where, when, how long) and against one or more of 57 trip-type scenarios. Classification is not exclusive, so a family beach holiday that includes two days in a city carries the needs of both.

Every claim reason is then ranked for that trip type on two axes taken from the scenario research: how often it happens on trips of that kind, described as common or situational, and what it costs when it does, described as minor or severe. The combination sets the tier.

Common and severe becomes a must-have. A child falling ill days before a family holiday, or an emergency admission in resort, is both frequent and expensive. A policy that does not meet these as standard is shown as having gaps in cover.
Situational and severe usually becomes a must-have. Rare events with uncapped downside, such as air ambulance repatriation or an ordered evacuation, keep their weight despite low frequency.
Common and minor becomes important. Individually modest but frequent claims, such as a phone taken from a beach, matter because the inner limits differ so much between wordings that the practical outcome varies widely.
Situational and minor becomes a nice-to-have. Reviewed in full, scored, but not given space in the summary unless something about it is unusual.

The same claim reason moves tier between trip types. Piste closure is a must-have on a winter sports trip and irrelevant on a city break. Single-item gadget limits are important on a family beach holiday and secondary on a walking trip where the phone stays in a pocket. The underlying research and weighting that produce these rankings are Prompted's own work and are not published.

3. What gets surfaced, and the outlier rule

A review that reported every finding would be a second policy wording, and no more use than the first. Surfacing follows two rules.

Must-have and important items are always surfaced, whether the policy meets them or not, with the actual figure or condition from the document. Strengths are stated before shortfalls, and no gap on a priority item goes unremarked.

Nice-to-have items and constraints are surfaced only where the policy is an outlier. An outlier is a term that sits materially outside the reference range recorded in the needs research for that cover item, or that a reasonable buyer would not expect to find. This is a test against a documented range, not a ranking against the other policies shown to the customer, and the review still reports an absolute figure rather than a comparison.

Two kinds of outlier are flagged.

Cover outliers. A lower-ranked benefit that is unusually restrictive, or unusually generous, compared with the normal range for that item.
Constraint outliers. Conditions, definitions, obligations, exclusions and eligibility gates that are unusually onerous. A narrow definition of close relative, a notification window shorter than normal, a requirement to obtain a written report within a tight period, an activity list that excludes something common on that kind of trip, or an eligibility gate that removes cover for the trip altogether.

Constraints are treated seriously even on low-ranked items, because a constraint does not reduce a payout, it removes one. Anything that can turn a covered event into a declined claim is capable of being surfaced regardless of the tier it sits in.

4. From claim reason to review question

A claim reason is not directly testable. It is converted into questions that can only be answered from the contract documents, which means the IPID and the full wording, with the wording governing where the two differ. Each answer is an absolute figure or condition with a document reference.

Is it a trigger? Does the wording name this cause, and in what section.
Who does it have to happen to? The insured, a close relative, a travelling companion, a person the trip is being spent with.
What is the limit that actually applies? Not the section limit, but the inner limit, per person, per item, or per incident.
What excess applies? Per person, per section, per claim, and whether it is waived in defined circumstances.
What must the traveller do? Call the assistance line before treatment, report a theft to police within a stated period, obtain written confirmation, notify within a stated period of the event.
What removes cover? Named exclusions, activity lists, prior knowledge at the time of booking or purchase, and eligibility gates that sit above the whole policy.

Eligibility gates are resolved before limits. If a policy does not cover the type of trip at all, no limit elsewhere rescues it.

5. How the answers are presented

Results appear on two levels at once. On the surface is a plain-language fit summary covering the must-have and important items for that trip type, plus any outliers, each with the figure from the document. Beneath it is the full auditable record of every consideration reviewed, including everything that did not reach the summary, with the reasoning traced to a clause. The prioritisation decides what a customer reads first, not what was examined.

Three further rules apply.

Cover is judged as sold. A must-have available only as a paid extension is a fail, recorded as remediable with the extension named. A free mitigation written into the policy, such as an excess waiver where a state health agreement is used, counts.
Obligations are surfaced as actions. Conditions the traveller has to satisfy are stated next to the cover they attach to, not left in the small print.
Time-varying external conditions sit outside the policy review. Government travel advice, announced strikes and current wildfire or flood disruption are tracked on a separate refresh cycle. They can change which needs matter most for a trip, but they never alter a policy's cover assessment.

Prompted's current scope is UK-resident travel on single-trip policies and does not include pre-existing medical conditions or extreme sports. Where a customer's circumstances fall outside that scope, the route is to a directory rather than a workaround. The FCA's signposting rules at ICOBS 6A.4 require firms offering retail travel insurance, including intermediaries and appointed representatives, to direct a customer to a directory of specialist firms where cover is declined because of a pre-existing medical condition, where a medical exclusion will not be removed, or where the additional premium attributable to the condition is more than £200. That threshold replaced the previous £100 figure on 1 January 2026 and is now reviewed every five years against the Consumer Prices Index. The MoneyHelper and BIBA directories are the recognised routes.

6. Worked examples: a family beach holiday in France

The questions below are ones families actually ask. Each is shown with its ranking for this trip type and whether it reaches the summary or is held back unless the policy is an outlier. All of them are reviewed on every policy.

Always surfaced: common and severe

A child gets ill two days before we go. Cancellation. The review tests whether a medical practitioner must certify that travel is inadvisable, whether the excess applies per person (a family of four can pay four excesses on one cancelled trip), whether unused excursions, parking and car hire are recoverable alongside flights and accommodation, and the notification time bar. A narrow definition of the people whose illness counts is flagged as a constraint outlier.
A child is injured in the pool. Emergency medical, with a possible liability element. The review tests the pre-authorisation condition, whether pool use and any waterslide or diving activity sits inside the standard activity list, ambulance and dental sub-limits, and whether the insurer settles directly with the hospital or reimburses afterwards.
A child needs private treatment. Part of the medical must-have. Most wordings cover private care only where state care is unavailable or unsuitable, and require the assistance company to approve in-patient or non-emergency treatment in advance. That call is surfaced as an obligation, alongside the per person excess.
One parent becomes ill. Medical, plus the knock-on costs that are usually the larger number. The review tests whether the policy pays for one adult to remain with the patient, whether additional accommodation and travel are covered, whether an escort is included, and whether the children's return travel home is covered.
We have to come home early. Curtailment. The review tests whether payment is pro rata on unused days, whether additional travel costs home are included, whether the trigger extends to a close relative who is not travelling, and whether one member of the party returning early affects the others' cover.

Always surfaced: situational and severe

A wildfire or a mistral makes the resort unusable. Natural catastrophe cover, which the location and season layer raises to a must-have for a Mediterranean summer. The review tests whether the wording has a section for it, whether the trigger is the accommodation being uninhabitable or an evacuation being ordered by a local authority, whether additional accommodation and transport are covered, and whether curtailment applies. Disruption in the area without a specific trigger is usually not enough.
The apartment company goes bust. End supplier failure. The review tests whether this is standard, a named extension, or excluded, and records a remediable fail where a must-have is available only as a paid extension. Package bookings may be protected by ATOL or ABTA. A card payment may give a further route, though Section 75 applies only to credit card purchases between £100 and £30,000 and requires a direct link between the cardholder, the card provider and the supplier, which often fails where the booking went through an agent. Chargeback is the debit card route and is a card scheme rule rather than a statutory right.
The FCDO advises against travel. An eligibility question before a cover question, so it is always surfaced. Many wordings do not treat a change in government advice as a cancellation trigger. Most exclude claims arising where a trip goes ahead against that advice, and some remove cover for the trip altogether. The review states which applies, and whether anything known at the time of booking or purchase is excluded.

Always surfaced: common, individually smaller, but widely divergent between wordings

A phone or iPad is stolen from the beach. Baggage and gadgets. This reaches the summary because the outcome varies so much: the single-item limit is often well below the replacement cost of a current phone, gadgets are sometimes excluded from baggage and covered only by a separate extension, and property left on a towel while the owner swims is generally treated as unattended and therefore excluded. The review states the single-item and valuables limits, the unattended wording, the police reporting condition and its time limit, and whether settlement is new-for-old.
A strike is announced at a French airport. Travel delay, missed departure and abandonment. The review tests whether industrial action is a named cause, the delay bands and the cap, and the number of hours before abandonment applies. The airline's obligations under UK261 and EU261 come first, and the type of strike changes what those are: an air traffic control strike is normally an extraordinary circumstance, so re-routing and duty of care are owed but fixed compensation is not, while a strike by the airline's own staff is generally not extraordinary and compensation can be due. The policy responds to what is left unrecovered. An exclusion that bites once industrial action is publicly announced, if drawn more widely than normal, is flagged as a constraint outlier.
Our flight is cancelled. The first route is the airline, which owes re-routing and duty of care. The review tests whether the wording covers cancellation by the carrier at all, whether it sits under missed departure, and whether losses recoverable from the carrier or card provider are excluded, so that the summary shows what the policy adds beyond the airline's own obligations.

Surfaced because the intuitive answer is wrong

Extreme heat makes the holiday unsafe. Heat on its own rarely triggers cancellation or curtailment, because disappointment and change of plans are usually excluded, and a heat-related illness is handled under the medical section instead. This reaches the summary despite scoring low as a claim reason, because a family cannot plan around a term they do not know is missing. Where a policy does name adverse weather as a cause, the review states the condition attached to it.

Reviewed in full, surfaced only as an outlier or as a mitigation

The hire car is damaged. Car hire excess reimbursement usually sits outside the travel policy, as a named extension, a separate standalone policy, or the hire company's own waiver, so it ranks as a nice-to-have for this trip type. It reaches the summary where the policy includes it as standard, where the limit is unusually high or low, or where the exclusions are unusual, for example an exclusion of tyres, glass, undercarriage and interior wider than the normal range, or a requirement that the hire agreement be in the insured's name. The separate exclusion for belongings left in a vehicle is flagged on the same basis.
We used a GHIC. Not a claim reason but a mitigation, and surfaced where it improves the outcome. A GHIC gives access to state-provided care in the EU on the same terms as a local resident, which in France usually means paying part of the cost and reclaiming the rest. It does not cover repatriation, private treatment, or the cost of returning home early. Several wordings waive or reduce the medical excess where a GHIC or reciprocal agreement is used, and because that is free and written into the policy, the review counts it.

What this means in practice

Rigour and brevity are separate stages. Every claim reason is reviewed on every policy. Frequency and severity for the trip type decide which findings reach the summary.
The tier of a claim reason moves with the trip. A verdict describes fit to one defined trip, not the general quality of a policy.
Must-have and important items are always reported, met or not, with the figure from the document.
Lower-ranked items and constraints are reported where the policy sits outside the normal range for that term, because an unusual condition can remove a claim that an unusual limit would only reduce.
Verdicts describe cover terms only. They contain no price or value judgement.

Key facts

Prompted reviews every policy against the full inventory of claim reasons on every trip, then ranks those claim reasons against the needs of the trip type before deciding what is reported.
Ranking uses frequency and severity for the trip type, on the axes common or situational and minor or severe, producing must-have, important and nice-to-have tiers.
Must-have and important items are always surfaced with the actual figure or condition from the policy document, whether the policy meets them or not.
Nice-to-have items and constraints are surfaced only where the policy is an outlier against the documented reference range for that term, which is a test against a range rather than a ranking against the other policies shown.
Constraints are treated separately from limits, because a condition, definition, obligation or eligibility gate can remove a claim rather than reduce it.
The tier of a claim reason changes with the trip type, so the same policy can correctly pass one scenario and fail another.
Cover is judged as sold: a must-have available only as a paid extension is a fail that is remediable via the named extension. Free mitigations written into the policy, such as a medical excess waiver where a GHIC is used, count.
Time-varying external conditions such as government travel advice, announced strikes and wildfire disruption are tracked on a separate refresh cycle and never alter a policy's cover assessment.
The FCA's signposting rules at ICOBS 6A.4 apply where a medical condition leads to a decline, a non-removable exclusion, or an additional premium of more than £200, a threshold that replaced £100 on 1 January 2026.
Prompted's current scope is UK-resident travel on single-trip policies, and does not include pre-existing medical conditions or extreme sports.
Prompted is the trading name of Prompted Limited (England and Wales, company number 16648304), an Appointed Representative of Innovative Risk Labs Limited, authorised and regulated by the FCA (FRN 609155). Financial promotions are approved by its principal.