Trawick International Travel Insurance Reviews

I spoke with Pia with Trawick International on 7/31/14 and she advised me to email eclaims@gbg.com regarding our claim. I submitted our claim on 8/3/14 and received an email back on 8/5/14 from the Claims Service Department in Foothill Ranch, CA with our reference number 201408030000001 saying "Thank you for the email. This has been forwarded to the claims department and we will get back to you if we require any additional information. Please feel free to contact our customer service team at customerservice@gbg.com if you have any questions or concerns. Rajesh Matangi" I have heard NOTHING since and contacted Squaremouth this morning and spoke to Amanda in your Salem, New Hampshire office. She is going to forward our information to the appropriate people for handling. Thank you, Carol and John Lauck

Filed a claim for flight reimbursement due to cancellation illness and was told I needed to pursue a refund for my non refundable flight from the airline. Would discourage anyone from using SquareMouth.

My mom was 89 at the time of the travel (Dec 1 2013 - March 23 2014 to Ft lauderdale Fl. She developed a severe bronchitis with shortness of breath and was admitted for 2 days to hospital. Because of her age I (her son) handled her claim. She has a pre-existing heart condition which I called about PRIOR to purchasing the policy. I asked if the $1000 for a pre-existing condition treatment for her heart applied, because there was also a clause in the contract excluding heart conditions. I was (mistakenly) told by the Trawick agent that the $1000 maximum benefit would apply for any heart condition treatment. Then after filing the claim and talking to GBG assist and also Trawick, I was given the opposite interpretation, i e that heart condition treatment was excluded. I should have been recording conversations just like companies often do as proof but obviously cannot do so. I actually called back and spoke to that same agent afterward and got a different story than pre-purchase of the policy (heart condition treatment is not compensable at all).
Anyway, that's all I have. My mom is not wealthy enough to sustain the added cost of the heart treatment which consisted of dispensing her usual daily oral heart meds while in hospital + blood tests to "rule out" an acute heart event, all of which were negative, and all of which cost about $1000). So I had to pitch in.

In summary, I'm upset about a favorable interpretation of the heart condition clause being compensable up to $1000 before purchase of the policy, and then a different interpretation afterward.