AFCA Upholds Insurer’s Decision in Breast Cancer Claim Case

2

The woman was diagnosed with cancer in her right breast on October 5 of last year, followed by the discovery of cancer in her left breast eight days later. She filed claims under her critical illness policy that she had obtained on July 17.

However, TAL Life, her insurance provider, rejected the claims based on the policy's three-month qualifying period for cancer coverage.

In its ruling, AFCA noted that the policy had provisions to potentially waive the qualifying period if the policyholder could prove they were insured either under a previous TAL policy or by another insurer for the same events, right before their new coverage commenced.

The claimant contended that she had cancer coverage through an insurance policy provided by her husband's employer. She presented a letter from the employer affirming that she was covered under a "life, accident, critical illness, and medical insurance" scheme from August 2020 until June last year. Additionally, she showed documentation indicating her husband’s policy did include critical illness coverage for spouses, encompassing cancer.

While AFCA accepted the availability of this cancer coverage, it was not convinced that she held such coverage "immediately before the current policy began." It also noted she had failed to disclose her previous insurance when applying for the new policy with TAL Life.

"There is no information before me about the extent of the critical illness cover the complainant had, if any, through her husband's employer’s insurance arrangements," AFCA’s ombudsman stated.

"Furthermore, it appears that any cover she might have had ceased about a month before the new policy started. I am not convinced there was 'continuity of cover' as suggested by the complainant."

The ombudsman expressed AFCA’s sympathy towards the claimant, especially given that the diagnoses occurred "very close to the end of the qualifying period." Nonetheless, he emphasized that there was no valid reason for the qualifying period to be dismissed.

"The qualifying period is reasonably short and its existence is not unjust. These terms are part of all insurance policies and they draw necessary boundaries. The enforcement of these terms is not inherently unfair," the ombudsman elaborated.

For a more detailed account of the ruling, refer to the original report by AFCA.

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

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Cyber Insurance Becomes Essential Amid Rising Digital Threats 12 Sep 2025: Paige Estritori The recent cyberattack on Fortnum Private Wealth, accompanied by ASIC's legal action, has spotlighted the critical risks cyber threats pose to financial advice companies in Australia. With digital integration intensifying across the finance sector, the owner of Fortnum, Entireti, plans to defend the case, underscoring the necessity for ongoing vigilance in cybersecurity measures. - read more

Swiss Re Foresees Rising Premiums Amid Increasing Global Risks 10 Sep 2025: Paige Estritori In a comprehensive analysis, Swiss Re Institute predicts that global property and casualty insurance premiums will rise in tandem with GDP over the upcoming decade. This growth is driven by amplified natural catastrophe losses, asset accumulation, and heightened economic and litigation claims inflation. The institute's report outlines the evolving insurance landscape amid increasing global risks. - read more

Insurance Council of Australia Assists NSW Flood Claimants 09 Sep 2025: Paige Estritori In response to the devastating floods that swept across New South Wales' Mid North Coast in May, the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) is taking proactive steps to support the affected residents. Insurers, organised by the ICA, will be meeting with flood victims in Kempsey, Taree, and Port Macquarie to provide guidance and support as they navigate their insurance claims. - read more

Ombudsman Upholds Policyholder’s Claim Despite Fraud Allegations 08 Sep 2025: Paige Estritori A motor insurance policyholder has won a significant dispute over fraud allegations, with the industry ombudsman ruling in favour of a payout following a controversial car accident claim. The case revolved around an incident where the claimant's wife crashed at an intersection one evening, reportedly failing to yield. The lack of photographic evidence due to shock and subsequent involvement of towing services complicated matters. - read more