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 construction sector remains under pressure, with recent insolvency figures continuing to show building and construction as one of the most exposed parts of the economy. Higher material costs, tight margins, labour shortages, delayed payments and fixed-price contract stress have all contributed to a tougher operating environment for builders, subcontractors and project owners. - read more
Recent transport industry sales updates point to a more selective new-truck market, with operators weighing replacement timing against finance costs, emissions planning, availability and contract confidence. For truck businesses, that matters well beyond the showroom. A change in buying momentum can flow through to vehicle values, repair economics, insurer appetite and the way fleets should set insurance sums before renewal. - read more
Fresh small business cyber warnings are a practical reminder that digital risk is no longer just a concern for large companies with complex IT systems. For Australian tradespeople, the most damaging cyber incident may be far simpler: a fake invoice, altered bank details, a compromised email account or a scam message that looks like it came from a supplier, builder, real estate agent or client. - read more
ASICs continuing focus on superannuation member services has put another practical issue in front of Australian workers: insurance inside super is not just about whether cover exists, but whether members can understand and use it when they need help. Recent regulatory attention on trustee administration, communication and claims support is a timely reminder for anyone relying on salary continuance or income protection benefits through their fund. - read more
Recent transport industry reporting has again highlighted growing interest in Performance Based Standards vehicles and other high-productivity truck combinations across Australia. For operators, the attraction is clear: fewer trips, better payload efficiency and stronger productivity on approved routes. For insurers, however, the shift is not simply a matter of adding another truck to the schedule. PBS combinations can alter exposure across vehicle value, route compliance, load responsibility, driver capability and recovery after an incident. - read more
Car insurance is an essential aspect of vehicle ownership for Australians, providing financial protection in case of accidents, theft, and other unforeseen events. As with any form of insurance, the premiums you pay can vary widely, so understanding the factors that influence these costs is critical. - read more
Agreed value and market value affect how your car may be valued if it is written off or stolen. Understanding the difference can help Australian drivers compare comprehensive car insurance policies more carefully. - read more
Car insurance is an essential part of owning and driving a vehicle, providing protection and peace of mind on the road. While most Australians are familiar with the basic coverage options, understanding the finer details of premium calculations can be quite complex. One of the key factors influencing these calculations is age. - read more
Comprehensive car cover is a type of vehicle insurance policy that provides the most extensive range of protection. It aims to cover a wide array of potential events that could affect your car. - read more
Car insurance is a crucial aspect of owning a vehicle, providing financial protection in case of accidents, theft, and other unexpected events. However, finding the right balance between affordability and adequate coverage can be a challenging task. - read more
Knowledgebase
Copayment: A fixed amount you pay for a covered healthcare service, usually when you receive the service.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.