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.
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
Latest general insurance performance data from APRA points to an industry that remains financially resilient, with insurers benefiting from disciplined underwriting, investment income and a continued focus on pricing risk accurately. For Australian small and medium-sized businesses, that is useful context heading into renewal season, but it should not be read as a simple promise of cheaper premiums. - read more
Australia’s prudential regulator has sharpened its focus on the insurance sector, with its latest priorities pointing to a market under pressure from affordability concerns, severe weather exposure, cyber threats and operational disruption. For households and business owners, the message is clear: insurance is no longer just a renewal task to be handled once a year. It is becoming a core part of financial resilience. - read more
Fresh commercial insurance market reporting suggests Australian businesses may be seeing more competition from insurers in selected areas of cover, particularly where claims history is clean, risk controls are well documented and policy information is up to date. For beauty salons, mobile beauticians and skin clinics, that is encouraging news, but it should not be read as a guarantee that every renewal will be cheaper or easier. - read more
Recent insurance dispute trends are a timely reminder that the quality of a policy is only tested when a claim is made. For Australian tradies, that means it is worth looking beyond the premium and checking how cover, exclusions, evidence requirements and claims timeframes would work in a real job-site problem. - read more
Liability insurance can cover different business risks depending on whether a claim involves third-party injury, property damage, professional advice or products supplied. This guide explains the main types of liability insurance in Australia and how they differ. - read more
Public liability insurance is a type of insurance policy that provides coverage for businesses and individuals against claims made by third parties for injuries or damages sustained while on their property or as a result of their activities. - read more
Welcome to our comprehensive guide on public liability insurance. If you run a business, you've probably heard this term thrown around quite often. But what exactly is public liability insurance? - read more
Welcome to our comprehensive guide on public liability insurance, an essential safeguard for businesses across Australia. Navigating the complexities of liability insurance can be a daunting task for many business owners, but it’s a critical component of your business protection plan. If incidents such as accidents or property damage occur, liability insurance is the barrier that stands between your business and financial calamity. - read more
For Australian business owners, planning for unforeseen disasters is not just prudent; it's an essential aspect of sustaining operations amidst challenges. Recognizing the importance of comprehensive strategies, including robust insurance cover, can make all the difference in business longevity and legal protection. As we navigate the complexities of running a business, it's imperative to have a safeguard against mishaps that could otherwise jeopardize our hard-earned success. - read more
Start Here !
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.