The company behind the claim stated that the properties were impacted by a 5.4-magnitude earthquake that occurred in November 2018. Although the earthquake's epicenter was approximately 45 kilometers away from the buildings, Geoscience Australia specified the evident damage radius to be no more than 27 kilometers from the epicenter.
In their defense, the claimant's engineering expert conceded that the buildings were situated outside the primary damage zone but contended that the earthquake’s vibrations had unleashed energy beneath the geological formations on which the houses stood.
The expert identified "preexisting or dormant conditions" in the properties, including previously repaired damage which, according to him, reopened due to ground movement prompted by the quake, also leading to the manifestation of new fractures.
Meanwhile, Allianz, the insurance provider, enlisted a forensic civil and structural engineer who assessed the damages. His findings revealed brickwork fissures in multiple sections of one property, referred to as House H, and evident cracks within the garage of the second property, termed House P, in addition to a separation between a storeroom and the home.
The engineer hired by Allianz attributed the damage to prolonged foundation instability and deterioration of the mortar used in the brickwork, rather than to the seismic event.
The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) upheld the insurer’s position, noting that both engineers corroborated the presence of damage similar to what was being contested even before the 2018 earthquake, specifically in House H.
AFCA further mentioned that updates made to certain rooms within the house remained unaffected, while external brickwork conditions pointed towards significant wear and tear, contributing to the losses. Comparable remarks were also made in regard to House P.
"While both experts agree it is conceivable for House H to incur earthquake-related damage under ideal conditions despite its location outside the designated impact radius, the insurer's expert refuted the existence of such conditions in this case," stated the adjudicator from AFCA.
"Even if the earthquake were recognized as being a proximate cause of the damage to House H, it would coexist with other excluded factors (wear and tear, prolonged structural movement)."
"Consequently, the insurer maintains the right to invoke those exclusions as a basis for denying the claim," AFCA concluded.
Published:Thursday, 1st Aug 2024
Source: Paige Estritori
| ASIC Initiates Legal Proceedings Against Australian Super for Claim Delays 10 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has initiated legal action against Australian Super, the nation's largest superannuation fund, alleging significant delays in processing nearly 7,000 death benefit claims. These delays, some extending up to four years, have raised serious concerns about the efficiency and fairness of the fund's claims handling processes. - read more |
| Australian Insurers Face Challenges in Risk Preparedness 10 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori Recent findings from PwC's Insurance Banana Skins Survey indicate that Australian insurers are trailing behind their global counterparts in preparedness for emerging risks, particularly in areas such as cybersecurity and artificial intelligence (AI). - read more |
| Insurance News to Host Third Annual Conference in Sydney 10 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori Insurance News has announced its third annual conference, scheduled to take place in Sydney on March 19, 2026. This full-day event aims to provide attendees with comprehensive insights into current market trends, industry pressures, and emerging opportunities within the insurance sector. - read more |
| Rising Home Insurance Costs Amid Climate Change Concerns 10 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori Australians are facing escalating home insurance premiums, with climate change playing a significant role in this upward trend. Insurance Australia Group (IAG) has highlighted that the increasing frequency and severity of weather events are contributing to higher costs for homeowners. - read more |
| The importance of Income Protection Insurance for Employees While some people might think that income protection insurance is only for self-employed individuals, this is not accurate. This type of insurance is just as beneficial for employees, because accidents and illnesses can happen to anyone at any time. Workers' compensation provides only limited coverage, and most employees don't have much more than a few weeks' sick leave accrued. Of course, if you have more than one job, the situation becomes more of a concern if you are injured at one workplace resulting in being unable to work at either. - read more
|
| The Importance of Disability Income Protection Programs for Cafe Owners Running a cafe is more than just a business; it’s a passion for many. However, for cafe owners, the risk of an injury or illness that could interrupt their ability to work is a genuine concern. Disability income protection is crucial as it provides financial security if you're unable to earn an income due to health issues. - read more
|
| Life Insurance Audit: Regular Check-Ups for Your Policy's Health Life insurance serves as a crucial safety net, guarding your loved ones against the unforeseen. Just as you would take care of your health through regular check-ups, it is equally important to ensure that your life insurance policy remains in sound condition to provide the necessary protection. - read more
|
| Busting the Myth That Income Protection is Only for Physical Injuries To all the self-employed Australians! You're the backbone of our economy, recognized for your entrepreneurial spirit and abilities to navigate the unique challenges of managing your own business. Yet, with great freedom comes great responsibility, particularly when it comes to securing your financial well-being. - read more
|