Quake Damage Claims Dismissed Over Previous Faults

The information on this website is general in nature and does not take into account your objectives, financial situation, or needs. Consider seeking personal advice from a licensed adviser before acting on any information.

The company behind the claim stated that the properties were impacted by a 5.4-magnitude earthquake that occurred in November 2018. Although the earthquake's epicenter was approximately 45 kilometers away from the buildings, Geoscience Australia specified the evident damage radius to be no more than 27 kilometers from the epicenter.

In their defense, the claimant's engineering expert conceded that the buildings were situated outside the primary damage zone but contended that the earthquake’s vibrations had unleashed energy beneath the geological formations on which the houses stood.

The expert identified "preexisting or dormant conditions" in the properties, including previously repaired damage which, according to him, reopened due to ground movement prompted by the quake, also leading to the manifestation of new fractures.

Meanwhile, Allianz, the insurance provider, enlisted a forensic civil and structural engineer who assessed the damages. His findings revealed brickwork fissures in multiple sections of one property, referred to as House H, and evident cracks within the garage of the second property, termed House P, in addition to a separation between a storeroom and the home.

The engineer hired by Allianz attributed the damage to prolonged foundation instability and deterioration of the mortar used in the brickwork, rather than to the seismic event.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) upheld the insurer’s position, noting that both engineers corroborated the presence of damage similar to what was being contested even before the 2018 earthquake, specifically in House H.

AFCA further mentioned that updates made to certain rooms within the house remained unaffected, while external brickwork conditions pointed towards significant wear and tear, contributing to the losses. Comparable remarks were also made in regard to House P.

"While both experts agree it is conceivable for House H to incur earthquake-related damage under ideal conditions despite its location outside the designated impact radius, the insurer's expert refuted the existence of such conditions in this case," stated the adjudicator from AFCA.

"Even if the earthquake were recognized as being a proximate cause of the damage to House H, it would coexist with other excluded factors (wear and tear, prolonged structural movement)."

"Consequently, the insurer maintains the right to invoke those exclusions as a basis for denying the claim," AFCA concluded.

Published:Thursday, 1st Aug 2024
Author: Paige Estritori

Please Note: We do not endorse any specific products or companies. Some content is sourced from third parties, including press releases, and may not be independently verified for accuracy or completeness.

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

Claims Handling Scrutiny Offers Income Protection Lessons

05 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent industry attention on insurance claims handling has put a practical issue back in front of Australian households: a policy is only as valuable as the support it provides when a claim is made. For income protection insurance, that moment often arrives during illness, injury, stress and reduced cash flow, so clear communication and timely assessment matter enormously. - read more

What Fresh Life Insurance Data Means for Australian Families

05 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh industry data has again put the spotlight on the financial health of Australia's life insurance sector, with the latest APRA reporting indicating that insurers remain in a more stable position than during the most difficult years of claims volatility and pandemic disruption. For households, however, the important message is not simply whether insurers are profitable. It is whether the cover sitting behind a mortgage, young family, business loan or superannuation account is still suitable, affordable and clearly understood. - read more

Underinsurance Warning Lands at a Critical Time for Farms

04 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh insurance industry concern about underinsurance is especially relevant for Australian farmers as rebuilding and replacement costs remain stubbornly high. While the issue is often discussed in relation to houses, the same pressure applies across rural assets: sheds, fencing, pumps, tanks, grain storage, livestock yards, irrigation equipment and machinery can all cost significantly more to replace than they did when a policy was first arranged. - read more

ASIC Breach Reporting Trends Put Professional Risk Back Under the Microscope

04 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Following recent complaints data, fresh industry attention on ASIC’s reportable situations regime is another reminder that professional risk rarely appears without warning. Breach reporting, client complaints, remediation delays and internal control failures can all become early indicators of a larger professional indemnity exposure, particularly for firms that provide financial advice, credit assistance, compliance support, accounting, consulting or outsourced professional services. - read more

Insurance Complaints Put Policy Clarity Back on the Agenda

04 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Australia’s insurance complaints environment remains a useful warning sign for real estate agencies, particularly those relying on multiple policies across professional indemnity, public liability, cyber, office contents, business interruption and commercial motor cover. Recent dispute trends reported through the financial complaints system continue to show that customers are most likely to become frustrated when claims are delayed, declined, poorly explained or affected by policy exclusions they did not fully understand at the outset. - read more

Click for more Insurance News