Let's be clear that the reports on the effects on travel insurance are extremely loosely stated and that the RBS/Directline spokeswoman did the insurance industry no favours with the rubbish statements she was reported to have made.
The cute-minded amongst us might be tempted to call the future loss of a T5 bag a forseeable event, but it isn't - it's a simply an enhanced probability of a size that can be obtained from BA if someone at RBS is bright enough to pick up the phone and launch the right kind of persuasive enquiry. The risk is evidently still insurable by those insurers like Norwich Union who have bravely chosen to absorb the problem, and who have slightly more maturity as market operators than any of the RBS owned johnny-come-lately insurers.
In fact loss of a T5 bag is still insured under existing RBS/Directline etc. policies, too, and will remain so beyond renewal unless RBS/Directline clearly interrogate each of their customers and deny cover, or write it clearly out of their policy wording. If they decline any claims going forward on the basis of this forseeable event nonsense then I think they will very quickly get their collars felt by the Financial Ombudsman.
RBS/Directline are quoted as suggesting that their renewal and new business customers are obliged to declare any intention to use T5 as if it is a material fact. The enhanced risk at T5 isn't a material fact. It is public domain information so it is the insurer's lookout and they must clearly exclude it or not exclude it or ask a specific question and charge extra for it right from start of policy or renewal. RBS/Directline absolutely must not be allowed to bastardise well tested insurance principles for their own dubious marketing ends.