Car Insurance Refusing Payout or Repair

L[Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 17:13

Hi OzBargain, long time lurker first time poster. Yes it’s another car crash insurance story.

The Story:

Insurance is refusing my claim. We live on a quiet street. Basically you don’t drive on it unless you live there or are visiting a property. It doesn’t really go anywhere. Ordinarily I park in garage. This one night I parked on the street because we had guests over and all spots taken when I got home from work. I had a few so didn’t think about moving my car onto property after they left. Car was parked perfectly legally with plenty of space on the street.

Lo and behold, someone sideswipes it causing major damage to rear and driver side. They do the bolt and no witnesses. Reported to police. Got an event number.

My Insurance: Comprehensive. Agreed value. Vehicle usually parked in garage but I pay a little bit extra and list it as parked on property.

The situation: Insurance is refusing the claim because my policy is for park on property and they are saying because I parked in front of my home on the street it is not covered.

I’m fairly peeved. Not sure what to do. Am I stuffed?

Poll Options

  • 13
    You are stuffed
  • 529
    Totally unfair - fight it
Automotive

closed Comments

  • redfox1200 on 24/08/2022 - 17:21
    +50

    ask them where in the contract you does it state you are prohibited from parking your car outside your property on the street?

    • bobbified on 24/08/2022 - 17:49
      +9

      On the insurance application, they often ask where you normally park overnight - secure parking, garage carport, etc, etc.

      A major insurance provider may not look into it too much (unless there's something suggesting that the applicant has not answered truthfully as per the disclosure requirements), but the smaller budget insurers will often try their luck with your response for questions such as the one above. However, whether the initial decision stands or not on internal review or appeal at AFCA may be a different story.

      • MrFrugalSpend on 26/08/2022 - 00:39
        +4

        Agree - they do say normally. My understanding from some time ago when I studied this topic at uni is that insurers can't refuse to pay out for this sort of reason. What they can do is determine how much they would have charged extra for your premium if you had answered that you parked on the street and create an additional excess offset for the reasonable difference (for it not being in the garage at that time). In the same way, I was told when I got a discount on my insurance for having an alarm system, that if it doesn't go off when robbed, I would be up for an extra excess (of like $150 or something).

        I do think it important that OP tries to find some sort of evidence that their story is true, as they will assume they just usually park on the street and therefore lied on the application/disclosure to get the premium down - They do need to prove they were truthful on the disclosure as it's a big no no to lie. That will be what they are attempting to rely on here.

    • HeWhoKnows on 25/08/2022 - 19:22
      +6

      The policy does not state that you are not covered when parking on the street…correct?
      Besides how often do you park on the street when not home.
      And its "Normally" parked in garage. Not always.
      As you stated there are situations when you cant park in garage
      They are having a lend of you.
      Fight it for sure!

  • barge-in hunter on 24/08/2022 - 17:21
    +8

    What time did the incident occur? I'm wondering if you can play the "no guarantee it was going to be parked there overnight" card…

    What does your PDS say? Anything specific about the amount of time it has to be outside your property for it to be considered "not parked where you told us it would be"?

    I think this is pretty dodgy either way though - name and shame! I'm expecting it to be one of the "tailored to you" type car insurances though.

  • MS Paint on 24/08/2022 - 17:23
    +64

    Youi or Bingle?

  • spackbace on 24/08/2022 - 17:23
    +34

    This sounds like a budget insurer type of thing

  • try2bhelpful on 24/08/2022 - 17:24
    +27

    This is rubbish. So they are trying to claim that your car isn't covered unless it is, always, parked on your property? So what happens if you stay with a friend overnight and leave your car out the front of their place? I would be pushing back on this and say their answer is impractical. You reduce their risk by leaving the car, mostly, parked on your property, they can't expect it to be there all the time.

    • alxr0101 on 25/08/2022 - 07:56
      +10

      It's on another street.
      Insurance company argument is that, if you are at home, it needs to be parked off the street as per terms of the policy coverage.

      The key aspect is questions such as where do you "normally" or "usually" park it. It can be argued that you NORMALLY park it off the street but that term is not definitive. NORMALLY or USUALLY implies that "OCCASIONALLY" it is NOT parked off the street when at home.

      Argue it.

  • ihbh on 24/08/2022 - 17:25
    +2

    Big insurer or "cheap" little one?

    • Piranha2004 on 25/08/2022 - 13:04
      +1

      Has to be a cheap one. Most big insurers dont give a stuff where you were parked

  • oscargamer on 24/08/2022 - 17:26
    +38

    Just explain the reason it was parked where it was and ask them to review their decision.

    If that review is denied, go through their complaint process.

    If that fails, complain to your state's insurance ombudsman.

    • Noblejoker on 25/08/2022 - 15:20
      +1

      100% Correct

  • Ughhh on 24/08/2022 - 17:26
    +17

    From memory, they usually ask where you normally park your car. Normally doesn't mean all the time.
    I'm in a similar situation where I sometimes can't park in the garage. Interested to see how this goes, as its unfair.
    Who are you insured with?

  • timthetoolman on 24/08/2022 - 17:27
    +2

    Most of the time they phrase it 'where is the car usually kept overnight' etc.

  • mapax on 24/08/2022 - 17:28
    +21

    What kind of shit-tier comprehensive is this?

    • SausagesPizza on 25/08/2022 - 08:05
      +4

      Yeah, I want to know. Bloody heck, hope the OP gets it resolved and comes back and tells us.

      • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 09:42

        I hope so too

  • [Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 17:28
    +3

    I might avoid naming for now given the trouble that happened with the lawyers I was reading about a while back.

    It happened around 2am. The banging and scraping woke us up.

    Their argument was that I declared I would park on my property when the vehicle was at home and because it wasn’t parked on my property then it was a risk I didn’t declare.

    • try2bhelpful on 24/08/2022 - 17:30
      +18

      https://www.afca.org.au/make-a-complaint/insurance

      Have a chat to these guys.

    • brendanm on 24/08/2022 - 17:31
      +16

      Their argument was that I declared I would park on my property when the vehicle was at home

      To be that specific, it surely had to be Youi.

      • MS Paint on 24/08/2022 - 17:35
        +30

        Youu. You uninsured.

        FTFY

    • iNeed2Pee on 24/08/2022 - 17:34
      +1

      Can you please put my mind at ease and tell me it is not AAMI?

      PLEASEEEE

      • [Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 17:38
        +10

        AAMI is just as bad… don't lull yourself into a false sense of security.

        • iNeed2Pee on 24/08/2022 - 18:04
          +14

          Let's be real. Every insurance company are pathetic. Take your premium, look for any excuse not to pay out.

          • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 02:37
            +2

            @iNeed2Pee: yes, but even among insurance companies, AAMI stands out as worse than most of the rest. there's been a fair few similar posts about them on this website

            • Forkinhell on 25/08/2022 - 08:29
              +6

              @[Deactivated]: Yes, insurance companies will cherry-pick clauses in a policy to avoid paying for a repair.

              I had a claim for water in a boat engine refused by the insurance because I hadn't had it serviced every year.

              With my wife not being well, the boat hadn't moved for two years, I just ran the engine for 15 mins every 5-6 weeks to keep it going.
              So why would I pay <$5000 for a service for 3 hours running?

              I went to AFCA, and over a period of 8 months they reviewed PARTS of my submission and agreed with the insurance.
              (The manufacturer's recommendation was servicing every year, which hadn't been followed)

              That refused claim cost me $82k. Insurance companies are the dregs of corporate business!

              • brendanm on 25/08/2022 - 10:33
                +5

                @Forkinhell: You can't claim insurance on lack of maintenance. Was this a petrol onboard? Manifold/riser failure probably, which is time based, and not related to insurance at all.

              • MS Paint on 25/08/2022 - 10:59
                +3

                @Forkinhell: This is really weird. If you were in a boating accident and water got into the motor - sure, make a claim.

                Did you try and claim for a motor that that just got water in it while sitting exposed to the elements? I'm confused.

                $82k for a motor. Which motor? That's some bad ass outboard or even a friggin awesome supercharged v8 inboard.

                • Forkinhell on 26/08/2022 - 08:52
                  +1

                  @MS Paint: When I posted my initial response to Libby1977, I was conscious of not hi-jacking her story with my details.

                  As a consequence, I provided only limited details of my experience with an insurance company.

                  There are lots of details which I will not go into here.
                  Suffice to say, the insurance company sought and found a clause that they could enforce to justify them to reject my claim.

                  Unfortunately, one has to have marine insurance to have a berth lease in a marina, and they knew that.

                  • brendanm on 26/08/2022 - 10:34
                    +4

                    @Forkinhell: I deal with marine insurance claims all the time, they pay out pretty much anything, even things that would be classified as neglect that lead to submersion, lighting strike damaging electronics when there is no evidence of lightning strike, but there is evidence of batteries being connected backward. Your claim sounds like it was completely maintenance related.

      • Jugganautx on 24/08/2022 - 20:21
        +11

        AAMI took the word of a 19 year old p plater at face value that i was at fault when he had dashcam footage that he didnt disclose proving otherwise, and i had to chase them up for 3 weeks just to get them to rule in my favour. Aproximately 12 hours total on hold.

        AAMI then refused to give me a hire car until my car was actually being repaired when it wasnt road worthy.

        From crash to repair it took 9 weeks, i had to use right2drive to show them who's boss charging them a brand new corolla @ $280/day.

        Run far and run fast.

        • iNeed2Pee on 24/08/2022 - 22:23

          Did you put a formal complaint in?

        • Poor Ass on 25/08/2022 - 15:50

          when he had dashcam or you had dashcam?

        • kiitos on 25/08/2022 - 17:17

          Who are you with now?

          • G money on 25/08/2022 - 19:17

            @kiitos: I think he was the third party in this story. He wasn't insured with them but was claiming against the 19yo policy.

        • roddo on 26/08/2022 - 00:43
          +1

          Mine is due for renewal with AAMI… Might think twice. Normally don't have to use them but might go with RAC or something similar

        • jerjergege on 26/08/2022 - 07:59
          +2

          As most people know, you only see the bad reviews, I've had only good experiences with AAMI I've been with them since I bought my car new from 2015.
          5 not at faults, 1 at fault over the 7-8 years. When it rains, it pours, I remember like most of these happened within 2 years around 2017. Haven't had any since.

          They have given me hire cars all except for my fault one, and they even reimbursed me for my personalised plate for being damaged when people reversed into me or rammed the back of me etc. I still remember all of them.

          1, Some p plater ram the back of my car, I was stopped for a good 10 seconds already, the light had been red for ages.
          2, Someone reversed into my car in rod laver arena carpark.
          3, Someone t boned me when it was green for me to turn.
          4, On Yarra bank Hwy, on left lane to turn onto Queen St / Kingsway, I was on left lane turning, out of nowhere a van merges to his left and hits me.
          5, I was on wellington parade, when it changes into Flinders St, and this guy in front of me was driving in both of the 2 lanes, when he finally stayed in 1 lane, I proceeded to overtake him in the left lane as he was in the right lane, out of nowhere he rams into the side of my car. This old man tried to fight me , he argues with me I was "undertaking him" I said this is a 2 lane road why don't you get some glasses and stick in a (profanity) lane, I was simply in the left lane, tried to argue it was my fault, told him to find out through insurance. Luckily I had all of these on dash cam.

          The one I was at fault in was I turned right onto Boronia Rd when a truck had blocked my view trying to do a U-turn, when I left the safety of the middle section I got hit deffs my fault for not waiting for vision.

    • iampoor on 24/08/2022 - 17:39
      +4

      I've had a quick look online at the various questions when signing and my own policy documents - there is generally the word "normally" or "usually".

      Check your policy documents and if that is what it says, get them to review it and point that out to them. Best of luck

    • bobbified on 24/08/2022 - 17:57
      +4

      I declared I would park on my property when the vehicle was at home and because it wasn’t parked on my property then it was a risk I didn’t declare.

      The keywords would be "usually" or "normally".

      You'll have to go through their internal review/complaints process first before going to AFCA. In order to support your assertion that it's 'normally' or 'usually' parked on your property (except for that night), you can use evidence such as stat decs from your neighbours to support your case.

      A case like this will serve as a reminder for those who willingly take up budget insurers just because "it's cheap". When it comes to insurance, 'cheap' does not mean 'best'!

      • BargainBogan99 on 26/08/2022 - 21:32
        +4

        I've had many insurers, the worst experience I've had to date was with NRMA.

        Parked ute, was told it was written off. Was told I HAD to take the (below market value) payout and they keep the Ute. Then they sell the Ute at auction, listed as NOT a write off, and sold for 50% above the payout price.

        • deepblonde on 27/08/2022 - 08:13
          +1

          This is common. Probably all insurance companies do the same; I know AAMI do that all the time. Why wouldn’t they? They’re in business to make a profit.

        • bobbified on 27/08/2022 - 11:54
          +1

          They sold a damaged ute for 50% more than what they paid you out for it?

          If the damaged ute (assuming they didn't fix it before selling) was worth that much more than the payout itself (which should be the value of one when it's NOT wrecked), wouldn't it have been obvious that something was wrong? Was the payout value anywhere near that of the redbook value?

          They have places like AFCA to complain to when these companies behave badly.

    • HeWhoKnows on 25/08/2022 - 19:27
      +1

      We all want to know so we can avoid these shonky insurers.

      You are simply stating the facts of your circumstances
      Nobody can have a go at you for that

  • MS Paint on 24/08/2022 - 17:42
    +6

    From the Youi pds… (My bolding)

    decide how much to charge you based on commercial considerations
    and other reasons that we consider important; including:
    • the make, model and age of the car and what it is used for;
    • the address and security of where you normally park the car;

    Interested if op answered an additional question related to parking from that BS phone call they make.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 17:44

      Then that would be at work :D - I’m laughing but should be crying at my own answer

      • MS Paint on 24/08/2022 - 17:59

        You spend more time at work than at home?

        Also, unless you disclose the insurer, and if with youi any additional agreements you made, then this whole post is just speculation.

          • SausagesPizza on 25/08/2022 - 08:04

            @[Deactivated]: This has been a wakeup call for me since I actually work/sleep onsite on many days of the week.
            I will need to update my policy.

            What would a secure carpark be categorised as? Is that technically garaged or not? It does have a rollershutter at the front where everyone can enter/exit…

            • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 09:43

              @SausagesPizza: This is exactly what i was getting at

          • PeterSnoot on 25/08/2022 - 08:33

            @[Deactivated]: Can you mention a couple of those already suggested that it isn't then?

            • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 12:41

              @PeterSnoot: It’s not aami or youi

              • SydBoy on 25/08/2022 - 13:20

                @[Deactivated]: well, you want people to help you out but not a once you responded to those asking who is your insurance company… ! :D are you trying to hide identity? don't worry there will be many with your situation but for sake of those who is reading & responding just amend your post and clearly write who was the insurer that way actually if someone has similar issue with same company then they will help you much better then simply ignoring the question in my opinion.

                • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 16:11
                  -1

                  @SydBoy: You might see that I’ve given my reasons elsewhere. I don’t need another head ache.

  • pharkurnell on 24/08/2022 - 17:45
    +3

    Current Affair job.

    • FLICKIT on 24/08/2022 - 17:53
      +2

      Youi advertise a lot on those crappy morning shows so it's probably unlikely any of the networks would try to crucify them, they wouldn't want to lose the advertising dollars…

  • ChrisLevo on 24/08/2022 - 18:01
    +3

    I rather suspect that the garage/carport/street question is to do with theft, rather than damage.

    Otherwise they could say that you won't get paid if someone hit you at any time that you were not parked in the garage.

    Please go get them and report back.

  • holdenmg on 24/08/2022 - 18:19
    +4

    Bikies…

  • SlowCarSlow on 24/08/2022 - 18:31
    +18

    I'd love to see the reverse of this. Someone tells insurance they normally park on the street. Then one night they park in the front yard and someone drives onto the property and hits them. Insurance refuses.

    This is such a load of crap.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 19:44
      +3

      Thanks for your viewpoint. It’s valid despite incorrectly stating I told them I park in the garage. My intro was probably too long to read.

    • Piranha2004 on 25/08/2022 - 13:10
      +5

      You cant be reasonably expected to park in your garage everytime you are home. What if the OP had works going on in the garage or needed to use the garage/driveway for another purpose?

    • j0hnd0e on 25/08/2022 - 19:01

      So if you drive your car to a resort for a short holiday, is your car not covered when you parked in the resort overnight? Since it's its a higher risk area!

  • Tee Rex Arms on 24/08/2022 - 19:08
    -2

    Confused as to why old mate doesn’t just say he was hit and run into while parked at shops and just okay the excess

    • The Value on 24/08/2022 - 19:13
      +16

      He didn't know he would be refused because of such a preposterous reason. Almost unbelievable…

    • johnno07 on 24/08/2022 - 20:21
      +9

      Because there is a police report to the contrary?

    • smartazz104 on 25/08/2022 - 14:31
      +1

      They might still say "oh you weren't parked at home. How dare you use your car for it's intended purpose".

  • Euphemistic on 24/08/2022 - 19:17
    +2

    Do you have any way of showing you normally park within the property and that this was unusual? Eg last 7 days worth of CCTV? Google location services?

    • SausagesPizza on 25/08/2022 - 08:00

      Ibby will need this along with collaborative police report and statutory declaration by friends.

      I hope the facts fall in place and their story makes sense. If so, then the insurance company may end up having to pay out on the balance of things. I'm not sure if they are able to seek legal advice, but I would think the courts would compel the insurance company to pay if the story is in fact true.

      I can't really brainstorm anything new that might help. Maybe ask around for the neighbour's CCTV but this is their own private material which they may not disclose.

  • silenthillrocks on 24/08/2022 - 19:23
    +9

    Afca complaint and it will be sorted. They can't refuse insurance for this. Worst they can do is reduce the payout by % amount difference in insurance premium if you had answered the parking question differently.

    • Aust on 24/08/2022 - 21:28
      +2

      Agree with you unless they choose to exclude all potentially customers who park on the road. Hopefully the only thing he will have to pay is the extra premium for road parking.

    • akyeeeahdude on 25/08/2022 - 00:11
      +6

      silenthillrocks is on the money - Section 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 is applicable in this situation. That being said, he gets partial credit rather than a full mark (Aust gets a full mark though) for the reasons explained below:

      Essentially when Section 54 is applied to these circumstances, the Insurer could only refuse to pay the claim, if the ''omission'' or the ''act'' (advising the Insurer the vehicle would be parked on the street at night) meant that if it had been disclosed to prior to the event triggering the need to claim, the Insurer would not have offered cover. Whilst generally speaking, the vast majority of insurers would be willing to cover a vehicle parked on the street at night, regardless of the suburb or town, I'm sure there would be a very small number who may not agree depending on the location's risk (high risk) and/or potentially the make and model of the vehicle.

      If you'd be willing, I'd be very curious if you PMed me who the Insurer is. I can also offer some more information which may be of assistance - this situation has come before FOS and AFCA many times.

      *not legal advice

      http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ica198…

  • jakka on 24/08/2022 - 20:34

    Does google maps show your car parked out the front? If it does, may be hard arguing that it is normally garaged

    • [Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 20:46
      +1

      No. Why would it? Literally only park off property 1 or 2 times a year. I guess if google drove by then. Never checked really.

      Didn’t say garaged on insurance. I pay a bit extra so it’s covered for parking anywhere on property, even though I usually garage it. I thought id pay $25 more just in case. I know my post was a little too long to read

      • Euphemistic on 24/08/2022 - 22:10

        Didn’t say garaged on insurance. I pay a bit extra so it’s covered for parking anywhere on property, even though I usually garage it. I thought id pay $25 more just in case.

        Why on earth would you do that? They ask where you usually park it, you tell them where you usually park it. Don’t pay them extra for something you don’t need.

        • [Deactivated] on 24/08/2022 - 22:12

          I did it to be careful in case I did park it in driveway and something happened like hail or theft. It was only $25 extra. I guess i shouldve paid the bit more for the 1 or 2 times a year i park on street

          • SausagesPizza on 25/08/2022 - 07:56
            +2

            @[Deactivated]: Yes, that sucks, but maybe you can get a stat declaration from your friends that came by. I'm not sure how effective that is.

            What does your police report state? If it collaborates with what you are stating now then you might still get reimbursed after some fighting with the insurance company. Dig in.

              • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 16:04

                @[Deactivated]: I hope thats all it is

      • Hangryuman on 26/08/2022 - 10:04
        +2

        'I pay a bit extra so it’s covered for parking anywhere on property'

        that sounds weird - can you quote the wording of the contract where it mentions that ?

        if you're paying extra for cover 'anywhere on property' it sounds like you have assumed no cover when parked on the street … ???

        please provide the actual wording from the contract about parking

  • CaptainHoltisDad on 25/08/2022 - 01:27
    +3

    Times are tight. Insurers must be trying to cut down on costs. This seems totally unreasonable and definitely something worth escalating to a more senior claims consultant or manager. Read the PDS thoroughly - does it explicitly state that accidents occurring on the street outside the property are not covered if you elected for "park on property" coverage? Subjectively that's a stupid rule (you could then just park it one street over and say you were visiting a friend haha), as it would exclude cover for a physical area of (width of property x width of car) m^2.

    • SausagesPizza on 25/08/2022 - 07:54
      +1

      Yep. It looks like the OP's sacrifice means others will be more wary next time something similar happens.

      Sometimes I read these threads and think "wow that sucks", but for others it really could be reason to fix their policies, or to go back and read what is actually in there.

      • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 09:48
        +1

        Same here. I read all the horror stories and thats why i pay a bit more to say on property rather than garaged. Almost always garaged and occasionally in driveway. Thought I’d play it safe. And I guess I’m the dope for then parking on street. Hopefully i get some luck escalating it. I’m perplexed to be honest. I’ve been with the same insurer 10+ years.

  • TheOtherLeft on 25/08/2022 - 09:01
    +15

    So have YOUi told us who the insurer is yet or AaMI to guess myself?

    • akyeeeahdude on 25/08/2022 - 10:05
      -2

      It's not Youi or AAMI - guess again. Clever though…

  • ColtNoir on 25/08/2022 - 09:18
    +1

    For sure argue it. Like other have said the ‘usually/normally’ statement doesn’t mean it’s always there.
    As long as you have the facilities for off street/garage, and you don’t have it permanently blocked with storage/gym gear, then I don’t see an issue.

    I’ve never had to argue as when I was with regular insurance and had to claim it was my fault.

  • Lukeeeee on 25/08/2022 - 11:34

    Would they have refused to insure you if the car was parked on the street? Unlikely but maybe your premium would go up.. so maybe you’d be out a slightly increased premium.. but they should cover damage. You need to take steps towards suing them to get action out of them, otherwise they make money holding your premium and delaying paying out claims.. that’s the whole game.

  • lansi23 on 25/08/2022 - 13:17
    +1

    I wonder why OP is not disclosing insurance provider?
    Or did I miss it?

      • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 16:07
        +1

        I saw what happened with the wombat and the lawyers where everyone from ozb (allegedly) did a pile on with reviews. What I’ve said is all true. No missing bits or conveniently excluded information to suit my argument. That’s literally as simple as it was in my story.

        I definitely don’t want to get accused of defamation and then having that to worry about

          • SydBoy on 25/08/2022 - 18:34
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: i guess OP already gave clue at the begining sentance of the post "another car insurance STORY" where word "STORY" means it is made up situation nothing else … !

            defamation is illogical argument in my opinion.

            • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 19:09
              +3

              @SydBoy: You really are a difficult bunch here. No wonder people don’t engage and are afraid to ask questions

              • factor on 25/08/2022 - 22:26

                @[Deactivated]: Well, without the contract, ain't nobody got anything useful to say here.

            • GrueHunter on 27/08/2022 - 10:47

              @SydBoy: Let me guess - another fine graduate of the School of Like You Know Law and Sh*t at the University of Five Seconds of Googling?

          • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 19:08

            @[Deactivated]: Oh. Had no idea about the 10 employees. Might sit tight and let you know when its all done and dusted. Had no idea about ACFA so glad I asked here. Really appreciate the info from ozb

            • us3rnam3tak3n on 26/08/2022 - 02:48

              @[Deactivated]: Absolutely follow the AFCA process. You will need to go through the insurer's complaints process first. They saved me in the order of 100k recently (dodgy banking institution). Cannot recommend them enough.

        • akyeeeahdude on 25/08/2022 - 18:17
          +1

          Completely understand and that's fair enough mate.

          Anyway, you have the information I posted - there's really not much more for us to contribute. What I and others have said is complete and correct.

          • [Deactivated] on 25/08/2022 - 19:10
            +1

            @akyeeeahdude: Thanks so much

  • bitcoinorbust on 25/08/2022 - 13:55
    +1

    They just want to make you work for the payout. No way it will stand up legally. Its common lazy mans tax in all walks of business

  • Fapprehend on 25/08/2022 - 15:21
    +1

    You have to apply for an internal review, they will likely deny it and refer to to AFCA to pursue further.

    Once you lay out your argument to AFCA your insurer has 30 days to respond from when yhe initial complaint was logged for review.

    They are in the business of making money, not paying out, will take a bit of time, but you should get what is deserved.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join