Wedding insurance UK: what it covers, what it excludes and Section 75

What wedding insurance covers

Wedding insurance is a general insurance product sold to couples in England, Wales and Scotland. Policies typically include sections for cancellation or rearrangement, supplier failure, wedding attire, rings and gifts, photography and video, wedding cars, and public liability. Each section carries its own limit, and the limits are chosen at the point of purchase. A couple might select a higher cancellation limit and a lower limit for gifts, or the reverse, depending on the amounts already committed and the value of items in use on the day. The policy document sets the limits and the exclusions, and it is the policy document rather than any summary that governs a claim.

The structure matters because a single premium does not buy a single pot of money. A claim under the cancellation section is assessed against the cancellation limit. A claim for a lost ring is assessed against the rings and gifts limit. Public liability responds if a guest or a supplier is injured or property is damaged at the event, and it operates separately again. Supplier failure cover responds where a business such as a venue, caterer, photographer or band ceases to trade or fails to perform, and it may overlap with cancellation cover depending on how the loss arises. Photography and video cover may respond to a failure to capture the event, for example where images are lost or the photographer does not attend. Wedding cars cover may respond to a vehicle failing to arrive or breaking down. Attire cover may respond to damage or loss of a dress or suit before or during the event.

Because limits are per section, the total protection is not the sum of the limits in any practical sense. A loss falls into one section, or occasionally more than one where the facts support it, and the relevant limit applies. Couples comparing policies are therefore comparing the limits attached to the sections that matter most to them, together with the excess on each section and the exclusions that sit behind it. The premium reflects those choices. A policy with high cancellation and supplier failure limits and modest limits elsewhere will look different in price from one weighted towards attire, rings and gifts.

The 30,000 pound Section 75 backstop

Under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a credit card provider is jointly and severally liable with the supplier for breach of contract or misrepresentation where the cash price of the goods or services is more than 100 pounds and not more than 30,000 pounds, and at least part of the price was paid with the credit card. The figure of 30,000 pounds is the upper boundary of that protection. Joint and several liability means a claim can be pursued against the card provider as well as, or instead of, the supplier. The protection attaches to the transaction, so a deposit paid by credit card can bring the whole cash price within scope where the other conditions are met. This is a statutory right, and it sits alongside any insurance policy rather than replacing it.

Debit card and credit card transactions may also be reversed through chargeback. Chargeback is a voluntary card-scheme process with time limits, and it is not a legal right. It depends on the scheme rules and on the card issuer applying them, and the time limits are strict. Chargeback can be useful where Section 75 does not apply, for example where a debit card was used or where the cash price falls outside the 100 pounds to 30,000 pounds range, but it does not carry the same statutory footing. A couple may find that a deposit paid by credit card gives a route under Section 75 while the balance paid by debit card gives only a chargeback route, and the two routes have different evidential and timing requirements.

The interaction with wedding insurance is practical rather than legal. Where a supplier fails and the couple holds wedding insurance with supplier failure cover, the insurer may pay the claim and the policy may address recovery from the supplier or from another source. Where the couple paid by credit card, the Section 75 right against the card provider may also be available. The two are not mutually exclusive in principle, but a policy may contain terms about other recoveries, and a card provider may ask what other steps have been taken. The 30,000 pounds ceiling means that very large wedding budgets can exceed the statutory protection, and the excess above that figure is not covered by Section 75. Chargeback time limits can also expire before a couple realises a supplier will not perform, which is one reason the statutory route is often the more durable of the two where it applies.

What it will not pay for

Common exclusions in wedding policies include disinclination to proceed, circumstances known at the time of purchase, and pre-existing medical conditions of the couple or close relatives unless declared and accepted. Disinclination to proceed means a change of mind. A couple who decide not to marry, or who call off the wedding for reasons that are not covered, will not recover under the cancellation section. Circumstances known at the time of purchase means that a policy bought after a problem has already emerged will not respond to that problem. If a venue has already given notice of closure, or a supplier has already indicated it cannot perform, a policy purchased afterwards will not cover the resulting loss. Pre-existing medical conditions are treated in a similar way to other insurance products: they must be declared, and cover applies only if the insurer accepts them.

Weather is a frequent source of misunderstanding. Adverse weather is generally not covered in itself. Cover may respond where the venue is inaccessible or closed, because that is a failure of the event to take place rather than a disappointment about the conditions. A rainy day does not trigger a claim. Snow that prevents guests or suppliers from reaching the venue may or may not be covered depending on the policy wording and the specific section, and the test is usually whether the event can proceed at all rather than whether it is less pleasant than hoped. Couples should read the weather provisions in the cancellation and rearrangement section carefully, because the wording varies between policies.

Timing is another exclusion in practice. Cover bought after a deposit is already at risk may not protect that deposit, because the risk had already attached when the policy was purchased. Deposits are often paid early, sometimes more than a year before the event, and a policy taken out later may exclude losses connected to commitments already made. This is not always expressed as a separate exclusion; it can follow from the known circumstances wording or from the way the cancellation section defines the start of cover. The practical point is that the value of a policy depends heavily on when it is bought relative to the commitments being made. A policy purchased before any deposit is paid stands in a different position from one purchased after the venue and the caterer have been secured.

Consumer Rights Act and venue terms

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires services to be performed with reasonable care and skill and within a reasonable time, and unfair terms in consumer contracts are not binding. Wedding suppliers provide services: venues, caterers, photographers, florists, bands, car hire firms and planners. If a supplier performs poorly, the Act gives a route to a remedy that does not depend on an insurance policy. The remedy may be a repeat performance or a price reduction, depending on the nature of the failure and whether a repeat performance is possible. For a wedding, repeat performance is often impossible, so a price reduction is the practical outcome. The Act also addresses terms that are unfair, and a deposit clause that operates harshly or without a legitimate justification may be challenged on that basis.

Venue terms deserve particular attention. Venues commonly require a deposit and set out cancellation charges on a sliding scale. Those terms are not automatically unfair, but they must be fair, and they must be transparent. A term that allows the venue to keep the full price regardless of when the cancellation occurs, or that allows the venue to change the date or the facilities without a corresponding remedy for the couple, may be open to challenge. The Act does not prevent a business from protecting its legitimate interests, but it does prevent terms that create a significant imbalance in the parties' rights to the detriment of the consumer. Couples who are told that a deposit is non-refundable in all circumstances should treat that statement as a starting point for reading the actual clause rather than as the end of the matter.

Where a dispute arises, the first step is a written complaint to the supplier setting out what was agreed, what happened and what remedy is sought. If that does not resolve the matter, the small claims track of the county court is designed for lower value disputes and is used without legal representation in many cases. The limit for the small claims track in England and Wales is 10,000 pounds, and in Scotland the simple procedure applies to claims up to 5,000 pounds. These routes are separate from insurance and from Section 75. A couple may have a claim against a supplier under the Act, a claim against a card provider under Section 75, and a claim under an insurance policy, and the choice of route depends on the facts, the amounts and the evidence available.

How to complain about an insurer

General insurers and intermediaries selling wedding insurance in the UK must be authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority. Authorisation can be checked on the Financial Conduct Authority Register, which shows the firm's status and the permissions it holds. A couple considering a policy can confirm that the firm appears on the Register before buying. This check is useful because it establishes that the firm is subject to the regulatory framework, including the complaints route described below. Firms that are not authorised, or that are not the appointed representatives of an authorised firm, fall outside that framework.

If a complaint arises, the first step is to complain to the firm. The firm has eight weeks to provide a final response. If the firm does not resolve the complaint within that period, or if the couple is dissatisfied with the final response, eligible complainants may refer the dispute to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The Financial Ombudsman Service is free to the consumer and can award compensation where it finds the complaint is justified. The referral must generally be made within six months of the firm's final response, so the date on the final response letter matters. Complaints about the sale of a policy, about the handling of a claim, or about the interpretation of policy terms can all be referred where the complainant is eligible.

The complaints route runs alongside the other remedies. A dispute about whether a supplier failed to perform may be a matter for the supplier, for the card provider under Section 75, or for the insurer under the policy, depending on what is being claimed. A dispute about whether the insurer handled a claim correctly is a matter for the firm and then the Financial Ombudsman Service. Keeping records helps at every stage: the policy schedule and wording, the receipts and bank or card statements showing how payments were made, the correspondence with the supplier, and any photographs or reports relevant to the loss. These records support a claim under the policy, a claim under Section 75, a chargeback request and a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service alike.

Is it worth buying

The decision turns on comparing the total amount at risk against the premium. The amount at risk is the sum of the commitments that would be lost if the wedding did not go ahead, or if a supplier failed, or if an item were damaged or lost. That includes venue deposits, catering deposits, supplier deposits, the cost of attire, rings, and any non-refundable balances already paid. The premium is the price of the policy. Where the amount at risk is modest and most of it is recoverable, the case for a policy is weaker. Where the amount at risk is substantial and largely non-refundable, the case is stronger. The comparison is not simply the total wedding budget, because much of a budget may not yet be committed and may be recoverable if the event is cancelled early enough.

Couples paying by credit card and using established venues may already hold most of the protection they need. Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 applies where the cash price is more than 100 pounds and not more than 30,000 pounds and at least part was paid by credit card, and it makes the card provider jointly liable with the supplier for breach of contract or misrepresentation. An established venue with a long trading history presents a different risk from a new supplier with no track record. Where the main commitments are to established businesses and were paid by credit card, the statutory protection may cover much of the exposure. Where commitments are to newer suppliers, or were paid by debit card or bank transfer, the statutory route may not be available and a policy may add protection that is otherwise absent.

Timing and exclusions determine the real value of any policy. A policy bought before deposits are paid stands in a different position from one bought afterwards, because circumstances known at the time of purchase are commonly excluded. Pre-existing medical conditions must be declared and accepted. Disinclination to proceed is not covered. Weather is covered only in narrow circumstances, typically where the venue is inaccessible or closed. A couple weighing the decision can list the commitments already made, identify how each was paid, check whether Section 75 or chargeback applies to each, and then compare the remaining exposure with the premium and the limits on offer. That comparison, rather than a general view about whether wedding insurance is worthwhile, is what determines whether a policy adds anything in a particular case.

Source: legislation.gov.uk: Consumer Credit Act 1974, section 75.

Related coverage on Kael Tripton: Does Travel Insurance Cover Car Rental? What It Does and Does Not, Travel Insurance for Over 60s UK: Cover and Costs Compared, Do I Need Contents Insurance as a Landlord?, Is Contents Insurance Worth It? How to Decide Honestly, Which type of life insurance: level, decreasing, whole of life and family income benefit.

Frequently asked questions

Does Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 apply to wedding deposits?

It can. Section 75 makes a credit card provider jointly and severally liable with the supplier for breach of contract or misrepresentation where the cash price of the goods or services is more than 100 pounds and not more than 30,000 pounds and at least part of the price was paid with the credit card. A deposit paid by credit card can bring the transaction within scope where the other conditions are met.

Is chargeback the same as Section 75?

No. Chargeback is a voluntary card-scheme process with time limits and is not a legal right. Section 75 is a statutory right under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Chargeback may be available for debit card and credit card transactions where Section 75 does not apply, but it depends on scheme rules and strict time limits.

What does wedding insurance typically cover?

Policies typically include sections for cancellation or rearrangement, supplier failure, wedding attire, rings and gifts, photography and video, wedding cars, and public liability, with separate limits for each section. The policy documents set the limits and exclusions.

What is commonly excluded from wedding insurance?

Common exclusions include disinclination to proceed, circumstances known at the time of purchase, and pre-existing medical conditions of the couple or close relatives unless declared and accepted. Weather is generally not covered in itself, though cover may respond where the venue is inaccessible or closed.

How does the Consumer Rights Act 2015 help with wedding suppliers?

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires services to be performed with reasonable care and skill and within a reasonable time, and unfair terms in consumer contracts are not binding. A couple may seek a remedy such as a price reduction where a supplier performs poorly, and deposit clauses must be fair.