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.
Australia’s insurance market has moved into a more competitive phase, but truck operators should not assume that softer conditions will translate into automatic premium relief. A July 2026 market overview reported that insurer appetite remains strong for well-presented commercial risks, yet motor insurance is becoming sharply divided between disciplined fleets and higher-risk heavy vehicle operations. - read more
New research highlighted by Zurich has put a timely spotlight on a major challenge for Australian workers: people are living longer, but many are also spending more of those years managing chronic health conditions. For households that rely on a regular wage, salary, business income or contract work, this trend reinforces why income insurance is not just a product for sudden accidents. - read more
A recent Australian Financial Complaints Authority decision has put an important issue in focus for sales staff, recruiters, account managers and other workers whose income depends partly on commission. The dispute involved a policyholder covered under an employer’s group income protection arrangement with MetLife. After a work-related mental health injury, he claimed on the policy, but his commission earnings were left out when his pre-disability income was calculated. - read more
A fresh development in Australia’s insurance broking sector is worth watching for boat owners, charter operators and anyone who relies on specialist advice to arrange marine cover. On 14 July 2026, Insurance News reported that global private equity firm KKR had joined the consortium seeking to acquire Steadfast Group in a proposed $7.7 billion transaction. - read more
A reported data breach involving Lifeline Australia has renewed attention on a widening protection gap in the Australian cyber insurance market. While Lifeline has indicated that help-seeker and financial information were not compromised, the incident is a timely reminder that staff, volunteer, client and supplier data can still create serious legal, operational and reputational exposure for any organisation. - read more
Public liability insurance is designed to protect your business from financial loss if you are found liable for causing injury or property damage to a third party. This type of insurance covers legal costs and any compensation claims that might arise from accidents or incidents involving your business operations. - read more
Public liability insurance is a crucial form of protection for both businesses and individuals, safeguarding them against potential claims for personal injury or property damage that occur as a result of their operations or services. In an increasingly litigious society, having this coverage can mean the difference between staying afloat financially and facing business closure due to unexpected claims. - read more
Today, we're diving into the world of public liability insurance, a crucial topic for anyone running a small business or working as a self-employed professional in Australia. - read more
Public liability insurance is an integral safety net designed to protect businesses from the financial risks associated with lawsuits or claims. It provides coverage when a business is found legally responsible for personal injury to a third party or damage to their property. This form of insurance can significantly reduce the burden of legal fees, compensation claims, and other associated costs that may arise from unforeseen incidents. - read more
As a business owner in Australia, navigating the complexities of insurance is crucial to safeguard your enterprise against unforeseen events. Liability insurance emerges as a cornerstone of a sound risk management plan, protecting you financially when held responsible for accidents, injuries or negligence. Its importance cannot be understated, as it serves not only to defend your business assets but also to ensure peace of mind in a climate of continually evolving liabilities. - read more
Start Here !
Knowledgebase
Premium: The amount paid for an insurance policy, usually on a regular basis, to maintain coverage.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.