No tourist travel to US likely for “months”
Jun 15, 2020, 4:29 am
#76
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: LHR / LAS
Programs: BA GfL, GGL/CCR
Posts: 2,409
It’s a lot more nuanced than that. https://www.hsbc.co.uk/help/coronavirus/travel-guidance
Deleted as large font size. I blame BAs IT.
Last edited by crazyarmadillo; Jun 15, 2020 at 4:35 am
Jun 15, 2020, 4:36 am
#77
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: LHR / LAS
Programs: BA GfL, GGL/CCR
Posts: 2,409
I was just saying that the link provided above is good info re FCO advice and insurance. Thanks for posting that.
Jun 15, 2020, 4:37 am
#78
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,059
I'd recommend checking with your insurance provider. Our provider, that we've had cover with for years, updated their policy in April to not cover any covid related claims (travel or medical related) if the trip was booked after 18 March or you're travelling against FCO advice.
Jun 15, 2020, 4:37 am
#79
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: LHR / LAS
Programs: BA GfL, GGL/CCR
Posts: 2,409
Jun 15, 2020, 4:55 am
#80
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: BA - Blue > Bronze > Silver > Bronze > Blue
Posts: 6,812
Looks like quite a few others have covered the points I would make that put me off. Travel insurance is a big one, I would not travel anywhere if I am unable to get travel insurance and it needs to cover Covid-19 because I can't afford the high treatment costs in the US. It's quite unlikely I'd need hospital treatment even if I do get the virus due to my age but that's not a risk I want to gamble on. If you can't get insurance for even non-Covid healthcare then it's not a good to travel at all. I mean I could break my ankle hiking and have a bill for many thousands.
Also yes as @pauldb said historic death rate is a bad indicator. I've been following data closely on Worldometer and whilst the UK death rate is decreasing quickly the US isn't. I'm actually seeing case numbers there starting to go up, not down like ours is. On June 12th they recorded their highest number of cases since May 21st. If numbers were going down and there was talk of possible air bridges as there is with Europe I'd be more confident about my prospects of visiting the US this summer.
My vacation might sound alright in a Covid era due to being mostly outdoors, but you have to think in most national parks people go to the same popular viewpoints and crowd them and I don't want to skip these bits as they're busy for a reason. There's also limited places to eat, which will also be busy. I can also see some tours that visit special places you can't go without a tour not restarting due to it not being viable or possible to run them socially distancing. So to me, if I can postpone my trip and have a better experience next year with less worry and minimal financial loss postponing it that sounds like the best thing to do.
Also yes as @pauldb said historic death rate is a bad indicator. I've been following data closely on Worldometer and whilst the UK death rate is decreasing quickly the US isn't. I'm actually seeing case numbers there starting to go up, not down like ours is. On June 12th they recorded their highest number of cases since May 21st. If numbers were going down and there was talk of possible air bridges as there is with Europe I'd be more confident about my prospects of visiting the US this summer.
My vacation might sound alright in a Covid era due to being mostly outdoors, but you have to think in most national parks people go to the same popular viewpoints and crowd them and I don't want to skip these bits as they're busy for a reason. There's also limited places to eat, which will also be busy. I can also see some tours that visit special places you can't go without a tour not restarting due to it not being viable or possible to run them socially distancing. So to me, if I can postpone my trip and have a better experience next year with less worry and minimal financial loss postponing it that sounds like the best thing to do.
Otherwise all points are sound, definitely the insurance one, there is no chance I would visit the US without health insurance.
I’d most certainly postpone your trip if I were you, my only point was that there was no point in doing it over ‘risk’ of catching.
Having experienced both first hand now, if you did catch it and need hospital treatment, I’d definitely rather be in the US to receive it!
Jun 15, 2020, 5:16 am
#81
Join Date: Jan 2020
Programs: BAEC (Gold) , Accor (Gold) , IHG
Posts: 684
My annual WW cover is with Mapfre Asistencia Compańía Internacional De Seguros y Reaseguros, S.A. (MAPFRE), through Virgin Money
The notice on their website reads..
In their FAQs they go on to say...
I read the 2nd para of the first quote that they are excluding themselves of any liability for COVID claims, whether Medical or Travel related, due to the Pandemic being a known event..
If this is similar across many policies then, even if FCO restriction is lifted, there will be no travel for many due to the associated financial risks (unless they ignore such).
Also, insurance companies will look for any excuse not to pay..
- imagine being COVID free when you leave UK for USA, but become infected en route..
- however before showing symptoms you break an ankle..
- when in hospital they give you a COVID test and you turn out to be positive ...
then you can wave good bye to any financial support
The notice on their website reads..
As the World Health Organisation has now classified coronavirus as a pandemic, this has become a “known event” for many insurers. In line with our policy terms and conditions, Virgin Money has categorised coronavirus as a ‘Known Event’ from 13th March 2020.
Coronavirus related claims will be considered for any element of travel booked before 13th March, subject to the policy conditions and Foreign and Commonwealth Office guidance. Any element of your trip booked on or after this date will not qualify for coronavirus related claims.
Coronavirus related claims will be considered for any element of travel booked before 13th March, subject to the policy conditions and Foreign and Commonwealth Office guidance. Any element of your trip booked on or after this date will not qualify for coronavirus related claims.
I bought my policy before 13 March 2020
Remember, if you travel against the FCO’s advice, you won’t be covered for any subsequent claims. If you’re already abroad decide not to return immediately – you won’t be covered for any coronavirus-related claims that arise as a result of your decision to stay abroad (e.g. in the event that you contract the virus or experience further delays or cancellations during your trip home).
Remember, if you travel against the FCO’s advice, you won’t be covered for any subsequent claims. If you’re already abroad decide not to return immediately – you won’t be covered for any coronavirus-related claims that arise as a result of your decision to stay abroad (e.g. in the event that you contract the virus or experience further delays or cancellations during your trip home).
If this is similar across many policies then, even if FCO restriction is lifted, there will be no travel for many due to the associated financial risks (unless they ignore such).
Also, insurance companies will look for any excuse not to pay..
- imagine being COVID free when you leave UK for USA, but become infected en route..
- however before showing symptoms you break an ankle..
- when in hospital they give you a COVID test and you turn out to be positive ...
then you can wave good bye to any financial support
Jun 15, 2020, 5:37 am
#82
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the air
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, Bonvoy LT Plat, Hilton Gold, GHA Tit, BA Gold, Turkish Elite
Posts: 8,714
Separate to medical insurance for Covid-19 (which if you’re in the US is obviously the big one), don’t forget the costs of being stuck in a country if it goes under lockdown or if you get quarantined. I ran up a ~$20,000 bill in Europe waiting to be able to go home in the first wave. Just imagine being stuck somewhere like Manhattan instead. Some insurance will cover this, mine certainly doesn’t.
Jun 15, 2020, 5:51 am
#83
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: KT7
Programs: BA & BD Gold Once Upon a Time
Posts: 530
I’m almost certainly going to forgo out Greece holiday due to the risk (very low, I know) of one of the family developing CV symptoms whilst abroad. I wouldn’t even think twice about the USA
Jun 15, 2020, 6:52 am
#84
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DEL
Programs: Mucci du Miel d'Or
Posts: 2,373
I expect the FCO advice will continue to be dialled down, but I expect most people will need to consider new, more costly travel insurance, if they do wish to travel.
Jun 15, 2020, 7:33 am
#85
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 264
A few things to add some nuance to this discussion:
First, the USA is not easily described as a single, monolithic entity (not unlike "Europe"). Yes, cases are rising in parts of the USA, but not all; and in fact are way down in the east and northeast. If the goal was to "flatten the curve", the east coast states and Illinois have - up to now - done that every bit as well as any other locality in the world, given the severity of the initial outbreak. While I can't think of a reason to come right now, New York - where I live - is probably as safe a place as any if the question is about transmission rates and infrastructure available for a medical emergency.
Second, the west coast had a very low number of cases at the outset through last month, and it is possible that their increase derives from increased mobility over the past month or so from east to west. Remember, the "European strain" of the virus is what we have on the east coast, which is not the same strain found initially on the west coast (the "China strain"). These vagaries will be important as the days go on, but anyone trying to predict what the west coast looks like in the next four weeks is just speculating.
Third: Florida. It is apparent that their laissez faire attitude toward reopening has increased the number of cases and hospitalizations. Same with Texas. I would avoid those states because, quite simply, their curve was not and never has been flattened.
Finally, on the broader question of border closures and reciprocity. I note that many say "I wouldn't let Americans in at all, given their virus stats". To that, I say see the above. The only way to ensure that the curve doesn't explode again, wherever you are, is to require testing. Yes, it can provide false negatives. No, it doesn't necessarily show you what someone will look like in three days. But if a country is trying to mitigate transmission and infection rates locally, testing a visitor before departure and showing the test result on arrival is the most effective way of doing that. A blanket ban on Americans or Europeans or any nationality is a throwback to the days before we had science. As a New Yorker, I am more likely to be "safe" than a Swede. And I can be tested if you ask me to be (see Iceland)
I am all for open borders, but if the ultimate goal is to keep transmissions low, test test test. I don't care where you live or what your nationality is. If you test negative up to 72 hours before departure, I'd be willing to place a bet on you. Tens of thousands untested tourists from "safe Germany" or "safe Spain" or "safe Italy" or "safe Austria" (as an example), regardless of their potential virus status? Not so much.
First, the USA is not easily described as a single, monolithic entity (not unlike "Europe"). Yes, cases are rising in parts of the USA, but not all; and in fact are way down in the east and northeast. If the goal was to "flatten the curve", the east coast states and Illinois have - up to now - done that every bit as well as any other locality in the world, given the severity of the initial outbreak. While I can't think of a reason to come right now, New York - where I live - is probably as safe a place as any if the question is about transmission rates and infrastructure available for a medical emergency.
Second, the west coast had a very low number of cases at the outset through last month, and it is possible that their increase derives from increased mobility over the past month or so from east to west. Remember, the "European strain" of the virus is what we have on the east coast, which is not the same strain found initially on the west coast (the "China strain"). These vagaries will be important as the days go on, but anyone trying to predict what the west coast looks like in the next four weeks is just speculating.
Third: Florida. It is apparent that their laissez faire attitude toward reopening has increased the number of cases and hospitalizations. Same with Texas. I would avoid those states because, quite simply, their curve was not and never has been flattened.
Finally, on the broader question of border closures and reciprocity. I note that many say "I wouldn't let Americans in at all, given their virus stats". To that, I say see the above. The only way to ensure that the curve doesn't explode again, wherever you are, is to require testing. Yes, it can provide false negatives. No, it doesn't necessarily show you what someone will look like in three days. But if a country is trying to mitigate transmission and infection rates locally, testing a visitor before departure and showing the test result on arrival is the most effective way of doing that. A blanket ban on Americans or Europeans or any nationality is a throwback to the days before we had science. As a New Yorker, I am more likely to be "safe" than a Swede. And I can be tested if you ask me to be (see Iceland)
I am all for open borders, but if the ultimate goal is to keep transmissions low, test test test. I don't care where you live or what your nationality is. If you test negative up to 72 hours before departure, I'd be willing to place a bet on you. Tens of thousands untested tourists from "safe Germany" or "safe Spain" or "safe Italy" or "safe Austria" (as an example), regardless of their potential virus status? Not so much.
Jun 15, 2020, 1:33 pm
#86
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: BA Gold; Hilton Honors Diamond
Posts: 3,227
The big challenge with the 72 hour test is not only being tested within 72 hours of travel but also having the results confirmed within that timescale too. That was what prompted me to cancel our 4th July trip to Alaska. Although we could certainly have been tested in time, there was no guarantee that we'd have the results in time. Alaska has introduced specific requirements for intra-state travellers and Anchorage has introduced additional restrictions (for example, you are not allowed to dine-in at restaurants). We decided it wasn't worth the risk, even taking into account the fact we could cancel flights and hotels etc. We'll plan on going back at some point in the future.
Jun 15, 2020, 2:18 pm
#87
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ABZ/NCL
Posts: 2,943
The big challenge with the 72 hour test is not only being tested within 72 hours of travel but also having the results confirmed within that timescale too. That was what prompted me to cancel our 4th July trip to Alaska. Although we could certainly have been tested in time, there was no guarantee that we'd have the results in time. Alaska has introduced specific requirements for intra-state travellers and Anchorage has introduced additional restrictions (for example, you are not allowed to dine-in at restaurants). We decided it wasn't worth the risk, even taking into account the fact we could cancel flights and hotels etc. We'll plan on going back at some point in the future.
Jun 15, 2020, 2:24 pm
#88
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada, USA, Europe
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 31,452
Jun 15, 2020, 3:38 pm
#90
Join Date: May 2004
Programs: LX Senator; AF Platinum and Club 2000; AA Platinum for life (former EXP)
Posts: 493
Beware of Fauci utterances. He is even more all over the map than our President, which is saying something. At this point he is best ignored.