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

Navigating the Surge in Insurance Risks for Australian Businesses 18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori Australian businesses are currently grappling with a complex landscape of escalating insurance risks, driven by factors such as increased litigation, rapid technological advancements, supply chain disruptions, catastrophic events, and geopolitical tensions. These challenges necessitate a proactive approach to risk management and insurance coverage. - read more

Learning from Near Misses: Enhancing Farm Safety in Australia 18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori In July 2025, Farmsafe Australia launched the 'Second Chances – Who Knows How Many You'll Get' campaign, aiming to transform near misses on farms into learning opportunities to prevent future accidents. This initiative underscores the critical importance of recognising and addressing close calls in agricultural settings. - read more

WFI's 2025 Farm Accident Insights: A Call for Enhanced Safety Measures 18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori In October 2025, WFI Insurance unveiled its annual farm accident insights as part of Farmsafe Australia's 2025 Safer Farms Report. The findings paint a stark picture of the challenges facing Australian agriculture, with 2024 recording 72 farm-related deaths—the highest in over two decades. - read more

ASIC Highlights Deficiencies in Insurers' Complaint Handling Practices 18 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has recently conducted a comprehensive review of insurers' complaint handling processes, uncovering significant deficiencies that fail to meet regulatory obligations. The findings indicate that insurers are not adequately identifying and addressing customer complaints, with one in six complaints going unrecognized. Additionally, systemic issues are often overlooked, communication timeframes are missed, and existing systems fail to record outcomes such as compensation payments. - read more