登录新浪财经APP 搜索【信披】查看更多考评等级 【#买三张车票被捆绑204元保险#】#男子买火车票被搭售航空意外险# 端午假期叠加期盼已久的年假， 张宪实打算陪同父母回家探亲，为了买到下铺，张宪实提前十多天便开始预订回乡的火车票，在某大厂 系旅行平台挑了许久，终于锁定了三张硬卧票，付款、出票一气呵成。然而，当张宪实打开支付宝账单 确认扣费明细时，账单金额竟比票价1800元多出了204元，他点开详情查看，只见扣费项目里赫然多出 了一个收款方为"天猫华泰××店"的账单，商品说明为"行程滞留津贴险"。张宪实发现，在订单详情的角 落里，已经多出了三份行程滞留险，被保人正是刚刚购买车票的自己和父母。点开保单，张宪实了解 到，这三份保险均由华泰财产保险有限公司（以下简称"华泰财险"）承保。旅行平台如此搭售保险，对 消费者来说真的公平吗？北京劭和明地律师事务所保险律师李超认为，这样的投保界面设计，巧妙利用 消费者急于购票的心理，将重要信息隐藏折叠或用小字进行标注，实际侵犯了消费者的知情权、选择权 和公平交易权。张宪实向北京商报记者展示的保险合同显示，每份保险共包含8项保障内容，分别包括 境内旅行意外伤害身故/伤残、航空意 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issue of consumers being unknowingly charged for insurance during the ticket purchasing process on travel platforms, raising concerns about transparency and consumer rights [1][10][21]. Group 1: Consumer Experience - A consumer named Zhang Xian encountered unexpected insurance charges amounting to 204 yuan when purchasing train tickets, which were not clearly disclosed during the transaction process [1][2]. - The insurance was identified as "Trip Delay Allowance Insurance," underwritten by Huatai Insurance [2][4]. - Zhang, despite being knowledgeable about insurance, felt trapped by the platform's sales tactics, indicating a lack of clarity in the purchasing process [4][10]. Group 2: Insurance Sales Process - The ticket purchasing process included multiple points where insurance options were presented, but the final insurance offer was less visible and misleadingly labeled [5][7]. - The design of the insurance sales interface exploited consumers' urgency to purchase tickets, making it easy to overlook critical information [8][14]. - Legal experts argue that such practices infringe on consumers' rights to be informed and to make fair choices [10][14]. Group 3: Regulatory Compliance - The article discusses the lack of compliance with regulations that require clear disclosure of insurance terms and conditions during the sales process [11][21]. - It notes that the insurance sales interface failed to meet the standards set by previous regulatory guidelines, which have since been repealed [17][21]. - Experts emphasize the need for platforms to ensure that essential information is not hidden and that consumers are adequately informed before making a purchase [20][21]. Group 4: Insurance Product Suitability - Concerns were raised about the appropriateness of the insurance product itself, as it included coverage for scenarios that did not match the consumer's travel plans [15][17]. - The insurance policy contained various coverage options, but many were irrelevant to Zhang's situation, leading to questions about the necessity and value of the product [15][17]. - Legal experts suggest that consumers should be able to understand the relevance of insurance products to their specific needs to avoid unnecessary expenses [20][21].