Compare Life Insurance :: News
SHARE

Share this news item!

Customer Wins in Insurance Dispute Over Laser Equipment

Customer Wins in Insurance Dispute Over Laser Equipment

Customer Wins in Insurance Dispute Over Laser Equipment?w=400

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.

In a recent ruling, a salon owner successfully contested a claim with her insurance provider concerning a dispute over a laser machine.
This case highlights significant issues around insurance policy interpretation and customer rights.

The crux of the dispute arose when the salon's laser machine broke down in February, and repair costs were estimated at $18,069. The salon owner had insured the machine for $50,000 in December of the previous year, following its second-hand purchase and refurbishment in 2012 for $66,000.

Despite acknowledging the damage, QBE Insurance reduced its compensation to $7,286, citing an underinsurance clause. QBE claimed that due to the model being discontinued, a replacement would necessitate insuring at $155,000.

The insurer's clause stipulated that if the sum insured was less than 80% of the "total new replacement value," the liability could be adjusted accordingly. However, the salon owner challenged this assessment, arguing that a comparable refurbished machine was valued between $30,000 and $45,000.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) intervened, siding with the salon owner. AFCA declared that policy wording began ambiguous, noting discrepancies in terms such as "full value" and "total new replacement value", creating confusion about the clause's intent.

AFCA clarified: "When the policy is read as a whole, it indicates the laser should be insured for its full value, or what it would cost to replace with a similar laser in a similar condition." They refuted QBE's expectation that the salon owner should have insured the laser for $155,000, indicating she would never recoup more than $50,000 under policy terms.

This ruling mandates QBE to cover the repair costs, less the policy’s deductible. The case emphasizes the importance of clarity in insurance contracts and equitable treatment of claims.



Published:Wednesday, 27th Nov 2024
Author: Paige Estritori

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.

Share this news item:

Rate this article

0 Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.

Insurance News

HESTA Announces 12% Reduction in Insurance Fees for Members
HESTA Announces 12% Reduction in Insurance Fees for Members
19 May 2026: Paige Estritori
HESTA, a leading Australian superannuation fund, has unveiled a significant reduction in insurance fees, set to take effect from 1 July 2026. This initiative aims to make insurance coverage more accessible and affordable for its members, aligning with the fund's commitment to enhancing member benefits. - read more
AFCA Supports Insurer's Application of Offset Clause in Income Protection Case
AFCA Supports Insurer's Application of Offset Clause in Income Protection Case
19 May 2026: Paige Estritori
The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) has recently ruled in favour of Nippon Life Insurance in a dispute concerning the application of an offset clause in an income protection (IP) claim. This decision underscores the critical importance of policyholders understanding the specific terms and conditions of their insurance policies. - read more
NEOS Elevates Income Protection with Increased Medical-Free Limits
NEOS Elevates Income Protection with Increased Medical-Free Limits
19 May 2026: Paige Estritori
NEOS has recently announced significant enhancements to its income protection offerings, effective from 11 March 2026. Responding to adviser feedback, the insurer has increased the maximum coverage available without mandatory medical examinations, aiming to simplify the application process for Australians seeking income protection insurance. - read more
High Court Decision Alters Liability Landscape for Marine Insurers
High Court Decision Alters Liability Landscape for Marine Insurers
19 May 2026: Paige Estritori
In a landmark decision, Australia's High Court has unanimously ruled that marine insurers cannot limit their liability for wreck removal and pollution clean-up claims. This ruling stems from the case involving Standard Club UK Ltd, the protection and indemnity (P&I) insurer for CSL Australia, following a 2022 collision at the Port of Devonport, Tasmania. - read more


Life Insurance Articles



Start Here !
life insurance
Apply now for your free Insurance assessment and price comparisons!

Start Here

Life Cover Amount:
Postcode:


All quotes are provided free and without obligation. We respect your privacy.
Knowledgebase
Elimination Period:
The time period between an injury and the receipt of benefit payments from an insurer, particularly in disability insurance.