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.
A fresh Australian Government vehicle recall for selected Isuzu MY25 trucks is a timely reminder that modern heavy vehicle risk is no longer limited to tyres, brakes, steering, driver behaviour or road conditions. Software faults can also create safety exposures that matter for fleet operations, incident investigations and insurance conversations. - read more
A federal parliamentary inquiry into small business insurance has pushed its reporting timetable into early 2027, extending the wait for recommendations that may shape future debate on affordability, availability and regulation. For Australian tradespeople, the delay matters because the inquiry is examining the commercial insurance lines many small operators rely on daily, including public liability, professional indemnity, cyber risk and business interruption cover. - read more
A new Life Code Compliance Committee inquiry has put fresh attention on the way life insurers manage longer-running income protection insurance and total and permanent disability claims, finding that clearer communication and earlier information requests could reduce avoidable stress for people waiting on claim decisions. - read more
A fresh safety recall affecting 3,710 Isuzu MY25 trucks is a timely reminder that modern truck insurance risk is not only about driver behaviour, road conditions or workshop servicing. Software, trailer systems and electronic braking signals can all become part of the evidence trail if an incident occurs. - read more
Australia’s life insurance sector is moving into a detailed debate over how mental health conditions should be treated in disability-style cover, and the outcome could matter for business owners who rely on insurance to protect income, debt and operational continuity. - read more
For generations, farmers have faced the challenge of protecting their crops from an array of threats, such as pests, diseases, and extreme weather. Traditional crop protection strategies have relied heavily on blanket approaches, as in using widespread pesticide application, or generalized irrigation systems, regardless of the varying needs across a field. While these methods have had their successes, they also come with limitations in efficiency, environmental impact, and the precision needed for optimal crop health and yield. - 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
Welcome to our detailed guide on comparing insurance policies for seasonal farming risks. If you're a rural farm owner, you understand the unique challenges that come with each season. This article aims to help you find the best coverage to protect your livelihood. - read more
Hobby farms, small acreage properties and lifestyle blocks can sit between standard home insurance and commercial farm insurance. This guide explains when a property may need farm-style cover, what risks often fall outside home insurance, and how hobby farm cover can differ from commercial farm policies in Australia. - read more
As a farm owner, your livelihood depends not only on the hard work you put in but also on the protection you have in place against unforeseen events. Farm insurance is crucial in safeguarding your investments, ensuring that your operations can continue smoothly even when faced with unexpected challenges. - 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.