Vero’s New Strata Product Signals a Shift in Cover Placement

The product sits under Vero Specialty Lines and is being distributed through intermediaries, reinforcing the role of strata insurance brokers in placing complex strata risks. For committees, the key development is not only the absence of commission, but the way Vero says it will approach defect disclosure and remediation.

One of the long-running frustrations in the strata market has been the treatment of known building defects. Committees are generally expected to be transparent with insurers, yet disclosure can sometimes lead to declined cover, sharp premium increases or narrower policy terms. Vero’s stated approach is to assess defects alongside the building’s remediation pathway, rather than treating every disclosed issue as an automatic barrier to cover.

If this model works as intended, it could encourage better governance. Committees may be more willing to document defects, commission reports and develop repair plans when they believe insurers will recognise active risk management. That matters because concealment or delayed action can create larger problems at renewal time, during claims, or when owners later question whether the committee met its duties.

This launch also extends a broader shift already visible in the market. Suncorp previously moved strata from a consumer classification into its commercial insurance focus, and Vero’s new product appears to build on that strategy. It suggests major insurers see strata not as a standard household line, but as a specialist class requiring technical underwriting, broker involvement and clearer pricing structures.

For strata communities, the practical takeaway is to prepare better information before renewal. Committees should maintain current valuations, defect registers, maintenance plans, fire safety records and evidence of remediation work. In high-risk regions, especially cyclone-exposed areas, insurers will likely continue to scrutinise construction quality, maintenance history, claims experience and resilience measures.

A nil-commission structure may also increase interest in how insurance advice is paid for and disclosed. However, lower or clearer remuneration does not automatically mean the cheapest or best policy. Committees still need to compare cover options carefully, including exclusions, sub-limits, catastrophe exposure, excesses and claims support. For many schemes, the best outcome will come from combining transparent remuneration with high-quality risk information and professional placement support.