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 broker transparency debate has resurfaced after the National Insurance Brokers Association released the final draft of its revised Insurance Brokers Code of Practice for consultation. The issue centres on whether small business clients should automatically receive clearer disclosure about how their broker is paid, even when the policy they are buying is not treated as a retail insurance product under the Corporations Act. - read more
The latest review of the Life Insurance Code of Practice has put mental health cover at the centre of the national conversation about life insurance, disability insurance and income protection. Independent reviewer Peter Kell has completed his final report, outlining 85 recommendations aimed at improving customer protections, claims handling, communication, vulnerability support and the enforceability of the Code. - read more
APRAs latest update to the general insurance reinsurance framework may sound like a back-office regulatory change, but it has practical relevance for Australian boat owners watching premiums, excesses and renewal conditions. Published on 7 July 2026, the reforms are designed to give general insurers better access to alternative reinsurance arrangements while keeping safeguards in place for policyholders. - read more
New analysis released by the Insurance Council of Australia has put renewed attention on a major cost pressure for NSW businesses: the emergency services levy, commonly known as the ESL. The levy is currently collected through insurance premiums, meaning businesses that choose to insure their assets can face a higher cost for doing so. - read more
New modelling released on 7 July 2026 has added momentum to the debate over how New South Wales funds emergency services, with analysis suggesting that removing the Emergency Services Levy from insurance premiums could deliver meaningful savings for many households and businesses. The findings, commissioned by the Insurance Council of Australia and prepared by Lateral Economics, support a shift away from loading the cost onto insurance policies and towards a broader property-based funding model. - read more
Financial security is crucial in today's unpredictable world, where unexpected events can disrupt the stability and comfort of our daily lives. For Australians, protecting one's income and lifestyle from unforeseen circumstances is a key component of personal finance. - read more
In the uncertain times we face today, where both health and economic climates are unpredictable, safeguarding your financial stability becomes paramount. This is where income protection insurance steps in as an essential safety net. For many Australian families, it's the buffer that ensures life's financial commitments are met, even when ability to work is compromised. - read more
Income protection is an integral part of maintaining your financial security, especially in the event that unforeseen illnesses or injuries prevent you from working. Enabling you to receive a percentage of your regular income, this type of insurance provides a safety net, ensuring that you can continue to cover your living expenses and financial obligations whilst recovering. - read more
Welcome to the world of insurance – a domain where words like 'deductible' and 'premium' can significantly impact your financial protection and peace of mind. As a beginner, grasping the basics of insurance terminology is the first step towards making informed decisions about the policies that safeguard your assets and future. In this guide, we will embark on a journey through the language of insurance, which can often seem as complex as the policies themselves. - read more
Filing an insurance claim in Australia can be a daunting process, especially if you are not familiar with the necessary steps and requirements. Claiming insurance is crucial when you need financial support, whether due to a natural disaster, accident, or another unexpected event. - read more
Knowledgebase
Insurance Underwriter: An insurance company, a financial institution that sells insurance.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.