A woman from Lancashire faced delays and confusion when trying to claim travel insurance to cover the repatriation costs of her husband’s body after he died unexpectedly during a visit to her mother’s home in Worcestershire over Christmas 2025.

The husband suffered a fatal cardiac arrest on Christmas Eve while the couple was staying with family roughly 111 miles from their home. Since the incident occurred away from their residence, the woman arranged for local undertakers to store his body before transferring it closer to home. She later located their annual Post Office travel insurance policy, which indicated coverage for repatriation costs if a death occurs more than 100 miles from home within the UK. Believing her claim was valid, she submitted it but was initially denied.

Her first claim, filed on January 2, encountered obstacles as representatives from Collinson Insurance, the provider of the Post Office policy, reportedly appeared uncertain about how to handle the case. The insurer declined the claim citing that the couple was not on a booked trip and suggested that she should have contacted the insurer’s medical assistance team at the time of the incident. The woman explained that since her husband’s death was sudden and under NHS care, she had not considered this action.

Despite the lack of a booked holiday, the woman argued that their visit qualified as a trip under the policy’s terms, given the distance from home and the intended multi-night stay. The claim amounted to £640 in expenses related to funeral arrangements. After initial rejection, she resubmitted the claim online in late March when final invoices arrived from funeral directors. The second denial claimed that costs were incurred in the home area, which contradicted her explanation. The insurer also mistakenly addressed correspondence to her deceased husband, adding to her distress.

Following clarification that the expenses were incurred in Worcestershire, the insurer requested further details but did not respond for two months. The matter eventually reached a third party, who intervened and prompted a reassessment by the Post Office.

Shortly thereafter, the claim was approved. A Post Office spokesperson expressed regret for the handling of the case, acknowledging that incorrect advice had been provided. The insurer approved the claim, issued the payment, and agreed to pay £250 compensation for the poor experience. The company stated it would follow up with a detailed explanation of the error.

The case highlights challenges consumers may face in navigating insurance claims under unexpected and sensitive circumstances, particularly when policies have specific terms related to travel and trip bookings.