Insurer Compensates Claimants in Wake of Transition Issues

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.

On September 2, 2024, an insurer has been mandated to compensate over 900 policyholders due to its failure to adhere to claims processing time frames outlined in the Life Insurance Code of Practice.

The Life Code Compliance Committee reported that the insurer failed to meet the necessary timelines for handling claims, resulting in 3580 breaches between November 2022 and August last year. This failure predominantly affected policyholders with income protection and total permanent disability coverage from a superannuation fund.

The issue arose following the insurer and the fund's decision to transfer claims processing responsibilities from a third-party service provider back to the insurer. The transition period saw numerous staffing issues at the third-party organization, which critically hampered its ability to meet the code's stipulated time frames for claims processing, the committee's investigation revealed.

The committee's findings indicated that the insurer violated several provisions of the claims handling process defined in the code. Specifically, the insurer failed to:

Inform customers about the claims process within 10 business days;
Provide updates on the progress of claims every 20 working days;
Notify customers in advance when their income protection claim payments were nearing their end.

"Insurers must ensure their change management plans allocate adequate resources to meet service standards and prescribed time frames," the determination stated. "Utilizing effective risk mitigation strategies is crucial in countering potential issues, thereby protecting against disruptions and safeguarding customer interests during transitions."

Post-transition, the insurer took over claims management on July 1 of the previous year and initiated several steps to bolster compliance with the code. The company formed new teams and conducted training focusing on code requirements and system utilization.

"The insurer has augmented its oversight of claims processing by increasing case conferencing, setting up weekly performance tracking, and holding monthly governance meetings," the determination noted. "These improvements led to noticeable increases in compliance rates regarding time frame obligations, which became more stable starting in December."

These measures indicate significant shifts in how the insurer manages and processes claims, fostering better service standards and accountability.

Published:Wednesday, 4th Sep 2024
Source: Paige Estritori

Please Note: If this information affects you, seek advice from a licensed professional.

Share this news item:

Insurance News

ATA Challenges Productivity Commission's Proposal to Double Truck Fuel Tax

01 Mar 2026: Paige Estritori

The Australian Trucking Association (ATA) has expressed strong opposition to the Productivity Commission's proposal to more than double the tax on truck fuel. The plan suggests phasing out fuel tax credits for trucking operators, effectively increasing the fuel tax rate from the current 32.4 cents per litre to 66.1 cents per litre by 2035. - read more

PERILS Revises Loss Estimate for November 2025 Storms in Queensland and NSW

01 Mar 2026: Paige Estritori

In a recent update, catastrophe data provider PERILS has increased its insurance industry loss estimate for the severe convective storms that struck Queensland and New South Wales between November 21 and 27, 2025. The revised estimate now stands at AU$2.95 billion, marking an 11% rise from the initial figure of AU$2.663 billion released in January 2026. - read more

Federal Court Denies Truck Driver's Insurance Claim Against Superannuation Fund

01 Mar 2026: Paige Estritori

In a recent legal decision, the Federal Court dismissed a truck driver's insurance claim against the Australian Retirement Trust. The case centred on whether the driver had active insurance coverage through his superannuation account, particularly concerning the 'dangerous occupation exception.' - read more