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.
Australias life insurance industry has moved into the next phase of reform after the Council of Australian Life Insurers released its response to the 2026 review of the Life Insurance Code of Practice. For businesses that use key person cover, the development matters because the code influences practical standards around communication, underwriting explanations, claims handling and support for customers dealing with difficult circumstances. - read more
A federal parliamentary inquiry into small business insurance has pushed back its reporting date from 27 October 2026 to 26 February 2027, extending the wait for recommendations on issues that directly affect many Australian trade businesses. The inquiry is examining the provision, regulation and pricing of modern insurance products for small businesses and not-for-profits, including public liability, professional indemnity, cyber cover and business interruption. - read more
A federal parliamentary inquiry into small business insurance has reportedly pushed back its final report from 27 October 2026 to 26 February 2027, extending the wait for recommendations on insurance affordability, availability and regulation. For Australian tradies and small trade businesses, the delay matters because the inquiry is examining the types of cover many operators rely on daily, including public liability, professional indemnity, cyber risk and business interruption insurance. - read more
A new Insurance Brokers Code of Practice has been launched by the National Insurance Brokers Association, putting clearer disclosure, renewal contact and client support standards on the agenda for Australian businesses that use brokers to arrange cover. The 2027 Code takes effect on 1 January 2027 and is designed to set out, in plainer language, what clients should be able to expect from subscribing insurance brokers. - read more
The Australian Financial Complaints Authoritys latest annual review has put income protection insurance back in focus, with the product again attracting the highest number of life insurance complaints in 2025-26. The figures are a useful reminder that the real value of cover is tested not at purchase, but when illness or injury interrupts a persons capacity to earn. - read more
Risk mitigation is a strategy used to prepare for and lessen the effects of potential risks faced by rural farmers. It involves identifying potential threats and taking proactive steps to minimize their impact. - read more
Farm insurance policy wording can determine what is covered, what is excluded and what you need to do before, during and after a claim. This guide explains how Australian farm owners can read a PDS, policy schedule, exclusions, excesses, sub-limits and disclosure obligations more confidently. - read more
Australia's agricultural sector stands as a testament to the resilience and ingenuity of its farmers. Yet, this stalwart industry faces one of its greatest challenges: climate change. Rising temperatures, erratic weather patterns, and extreme events, from droughts to floods, are now common hurdles on the landscape of Australian farming. - read more
Welcome to the world of farm insurance, where no two policies are the same, just as no two farms mirror each other in operations and risks. As a farmer, you are acutely aware that your agricultural endeavors bring a unique set of challenges and needs. Recognizing this diversity is the first step in protecting your livelihood. - read more
Welcome to our comprehensive guide on comparing insurance options for mixed farming. As a rural farm owner, you face unique challenges that require specialized insurance coverage to protect your livelihood. - read more
Knowledgebase
Coinsurance: A percentage of the cost of a covered healthcare service that you pay after you have paid your deductible.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.