Broker Not Accountable for Passing on Insurer's Instructions
Broker Not Accountable for Passing on Insurer's Instructions
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.
An Australian homeowner's effort to hold his insurance broker responsible for allegedly misleading him about coverage for emergency tree removal has been dismissed by regulatory authorities.
The incident unfolded following a storm that impaired trees on the insured premises.
Initially, the homeowner looked to claim a compensation from the insurer for clearing debris. However, he was informed that his policy would not cater to the removal of trees unless they caused damage to the property itself. Consequently, he took the matter to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), accusing his broker, Aon, of misguiding him in a conversation last December by implying that the insurer would bear the make-safe costs.
The homeowner presented AFCA with an invoice totaling $17,217 for tree removal to establish safe machinery access and an additional invoice of $7370 for further clearance. Aon contested the claim, asserting that their broker merely communicated the details relayed by the insurer to the complainant.
Aon backed its position with contact notes from the insurer which included recommendations to "remove dangerous hanging limbs as part of a make-safe, ensuring photos were taken of the removed limbs."
Records show that the broker had questioned the insurer about the policy's inapplicability concerning make-safe operations. "Our client has now been informed by the assessor that this 'make-safe' work is not covered – surely this would be considered make-safe work, given the alternative risks, such as electrocution or being hit by a falling tree or limb?†Bhupendranathmmmsiddharth_techtw, the email to the insurer reportedly asked.
AFCA’s ruling underscored that although the homeowner conducted the work thinking it would be covered by the policy, the actions of the broker were not prejudicial. The authority noted that the broker had diligently informed the client to document the procedures, yet there was no indication that a more extensive range of work was covered under the existing policy terms.
AFCA summized that in this event The broker did not make any remark or conduct any act that was misleading and deceptive, as it merely transmitted the information received from the insurer and that had the information provided been inaccurate, the fault lies not with the broker, but with the original source of information.
Additionally, AFCA clarified that even in instances of potentially misleading information, the homeowner may not have sustained a financial loss since the insurer would likely have not compensated for the make-safe work under any circumstances. Regardless of the insurance policy specifics, the complainant was obliged to conduct the necessary safety works. Even if there was incorrect information passed from the insurer by the broker, the liability cannot be placed on the broker by simply relaying what they were informed.
This decision supports the conclusion that Aon, as a broker, carried out its duty by correctly conveying the insurer's instructions and therefore, should not bear the burden of liability for the disputed costs.
This case offers a valuable lesson in understanding where liabilities begin and end in the complex web of insurer-broker-customer communications, reminding policyholders to scrutinize the fine details of insurance contracts.
Original information for this article was sourced from Insurance News.
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.
Fresh attention on cyber incidents across Australian businesses is a timely warning for restaurants, cafés and takeaway operators. Hospitality venues may not always see themselves as data-heavy businesses, but modern food service increasingly depends on connected systems: point-of-sale terminals, booking platforms, delivery apps, QR ordering, loyalty databases, rostering tools and cloud accounting. - read more
Recent heavy vehicle compliance activity has again put fatigue management near the top of the risk agenda for Australian transport operators. While enforcement is usually framed as a road safety issue, it also has a direct insurance dimension. Insurers assessing truck insurance risk increasingly look beyond the vehicle itself and ask how well the business controls driver behaviour, scheduling pressure, maintenance downtime and record-keeping. - read more
APRA’s latest general insurance data has again highlighted a point many Australian tradies are already feeling at renewal time: a healthier insurance sector does not necessarily translate into simple or immediate premium relief for small businesses. While insurers continue to operate with stronger capital buffers and improved underwriting discipline, the costs sitting behind many policies remain under pressure. - read more
Fresh complaints reporting from the Australian Financial Complaints Authority has put insurance service standards back under the microscope, with claim delays, communication issues and disputed outcomes continuing to feature in the wider financial services complaints landscape. For beauty salon owners, skin clinics, nail technicians and mobile beauticians, the lesson is practical: the moment a loss occurs is not the best time to discover that records are incomplete, policy wording is unclear or a treatment has not been properly disclosed. - read more
New South Wales insurance buyers may be heading for an important change as reform of the Emergency Services Levy continues to attract attention across the insurance sector. The levy has long been added to many insurance premiums in NSW to help fund emergency services, and insurers have argued that this approach makes cover more expensive for households and businesses that choose to insure. - read more
Welcome to a critical discussion surrounding the stability and protection of your farming enterprise. In the unpredictable world of agriculture, insurance plays a pivotal role in safeguarding the future of your business. As we delve into the intricacies of insurance coverage, we aim to establish a strong foundation for enduring success in the farming industry. - read more
Farm insurance premiums in Australia can vary widely because every farming operation has different assets, risks, locations and coverage needs. This guide explains the main factors that can affect farm insurance cost, how excesses and policy limits work, and practical ways to compare cover without leaving important gaps. - read more
The serene morning mists settling over green pastures and the peaceful clucking of poultry might paint an idyllic picture of farm life, but seasoned farmers know that this lifestyle comes with its own set of risks and uncertainties. In the world of agriculture, each new day could bring events that threaten your way of life and the heart of your business. This is where farm insurance becomes not just important, but essential. - read more
If you are running a farm, you already know that it is more than just a business; it's a way of life. Your farm is a culmination of hard work, valuable resources, and significant financial investments. - read more
Livestock insurance can help Australian farm owners manage financial risk when valuable animals are lost, stolen, injured or affected by specified insured events. This guide explains common cover types, exclusions, valuation issues and questions to ask before choosing a policy. - read more
Knowledgebase
Loss Ratio: The ratio of claims paid by an insurer to the premiums earned, used as a measure of profitability.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.