Sunday 16th August. Insurance companies are discriminating against heart patients

We have booked a holiday to Cuba later in the year.  Having cancelled 4 holidays we thought we needed to get away.  The holiday company includes free insurance with the package, so on Friday Helen rings the insurance company to provide the medical information they require.  They say they want to charge Helen £50 extra because she broke her shoulder skiing in February, and her leg when running in June.  no reason given other than "the computer says...".  She is understandably annoyed that they do so without giving any reasonable explanation.  Not to annoyed as we both are when they refuse absolutely to insure me at all.  Again the only reason given was "the computer..."   I suppose you cannot expect much more from the call-centre operative.  But she did not endear herself to us by refusing to accept that I was not suffering from high blood pressure and taking drugs to control it.    We decide to write to the insurance company for an explanation.

Why do insurance companies refuse to cover someone who does not have high cholesterol, who has had an operation to address coronary artery disease and who is less likely to be ill when travelling as a result?  The Times yesterday ran a major article about this very topic  "Taking Statins Doubles Insurance Costs".    It seems that that it is common practice to load premiums for people who are taking Statins whether or not they have the elevated cholesterol, and in some cases to refuse cover altogether.  In my case I take Atorvastatin not because my cholesterol levels are high but to keep my new coronary arteries clear of platelets but to help remove any clogging that Is still there.  

I accept that someone with a medical condition is a greater risk for an insurance company than someone without the same condition.  So refusing to insure, or charging a higher premium appears to be a case of simply limiting their exposure.  You might think this is no different to charging smokers higher premiums.  But the comparison is not valid because a smoker is someone who knowingly increases the exposure, whereas someone who takes Statins is someone who is reducing exposure.  Taking the drug may also be an indicator of poor lifestyle, since high cholesterol may be due to a bad diet or lack of exercise.  But it may also be for other reasons, as in my case.  

According to The Times, The British Insurance Brokers Association admitted that the additional risk is negligible but that a simplistic algorithm is used not to make quotations over the Internet complicated.  I applaud their quest for simplicity but is it fair that some people cannot get insurance, or pay too much as a result?