I have a current home and contents insurance claim. I started the claim almost four months ago. I’ve found that they consistently say things like I/we/someone will call you back by COB, tomorrow, within three business days, early next week - and then never do. I ended up having to follow up pretty much every week.
It seems to me that the companies aren’t tracking their representatives call back promises. They seem to only take an interest in consumer complaints.
Has Choice or anyone come up with a metric, scorecard, star rating etc. for promise vs outcome in relation to a company’s communications?
Your complaint reminded me of the story regarding a father who was trying to explain to his son the difference between annoyance, irratation and frustation, so he dialled a phone number at random.
He asked the person if Fred was there and the person siad there was no Fred there.
He said to his son “That’s annoyance”.
He called the number again and asked for Fred and the person replied that he had said that there was no Fred there.
He said to his son “That’s irration”.
He called the number once again and said “It’s Fred. Have there been any calls for me?”
@Fred123 it’s QBE. To add to it, someone there, having heard my frustration, opened a complaint on my behalf at 10:30 am then someone (else) closed the complaint 20 minutes later saying they have been told that my complaint ‘has been resolved to my satisfaction’. I haven’t said or written anything of the sort.
At a higher level though, I think it would be helpful to consumers to see a ‘service score’ that’s presented along side an insurance product’s terms and cost. To my mind the service level is part of the product.
AFCA is the ‘place you want to go’. You can troll through their web site to see a bit about rates of complaints as well as their periodic summary reports.
Having my complaint re: Super investigated through SCT and now AFCA, I have lost all faith in these government operated authorities.I was told that a Conciliation Conference was basically a friendly discussion to understand each sides case. I received all the paperwork for the Conciliation only 3 days beforehand - and then only because I kept asking for it. It was anything but friendly - I was faced by the Super fund’s lawyer. He had been through many similar cases and knew all the tricks - having been though the process. I was quite confident that I had a strong case - clearly not - I lost:cry:. Nothing about the process is equitable, it’s a waste of time, energy and expectation for ethical treatment - u get destroyed by a system - stacked by lawyers. So far AFCA appears to be no improvement
Hi Susan. I don’t know what your complaint involves, but PLEASE get some legal advice…don’t just run on A.F.C.A’s decision…They are NOT “Government operated” or even Government funded…They are a private “not for profit” Company, fully funded BY banks, insurance Companies and Super Funds! A.F.C.A’s decision is NOT binding on you…they just hope you are flabbergasted enough to give up. Start by telling your tale on Product Review (I started with “CGU-We screw you”, and keep ALL communication s in writing (by email etc.) Good luck, persevere, UNTIL you lose in VCAT or a real Court. Kind regards, J.
Hi swdeet. I am currently on the war path against CGU (home Ins.) and A.F.C.A…just about to lodge a writ with a REAL Authority…a Court. So…Do NOT do phone calls…do emails that you can print down, that are “written” evidence…just address them to the Claims department, with your Claim number, attention of any person whose name you have (or no-one) They are sucking you in, dragging it out…delaying. Lodge a written Complaint with the Company, immediately, and know that THEY have one year in which to resolve that Complaint (before you can do literally anything else). Mention you would hate to see them breach the Insurance Code of Conduct, and that you would hate to see them fail their “Duty of utmost good faith”, but that you are “keeping track” of such…for later “evidence”. They will know what you mean! Check out A.F.C.A & QBE’s reviews on Product Review’s web site…and get “armed and dangerous”. Having just wasted 3 years in an A.F.C.A Complaint myself, be warned that THEIR statistics are loaded with “closed” Cases (not necessarily resolved) and other “get it off the books”, so it looks “resolved” dirty tricks. Get your Complaint of “Claim not being expedited in a timely fashion, and communication not happening” lodged with QBE post haste…and good luck. Kind regards, J.
Superannuation complaints adjudicated by ACFA are binding with no right of review, it is binding on both parties. From their site
“we may make a decision (called a determination). If we make a determination that is in your favour and you accept it, the financial firm is required to comply with the determination and any remedy that we award. For superannuation complaints, any determination that we make is binding on both parties.
Sometimes, it may be appropriate for us to make a decision straight away, rather than try and reach a settlement through negotiation or conciliation.”
If they decide against you in a Super matter no Court can override the decision, and they can decide a matter without further input from any party.
The systems are provided as an alternative to using the courts for resolution.
Once upon a time even the most mundane of issues were settled before a Magistrate in the local court. Owed a months wages, husband not paying maintenance, chooks annoying the neighbours, etc etc. Court costs seemed reasonable, and hearings relatively timely with reference to old news print accessible through Trove.
Supposedly these days keeping complaints out of the courts saves time and money. It is also supposed to put resolution within the grasp of the average consumer at minimal cost. For consumer claims of hundreds to a few thousands of dollars it may hold true most of the time.
For more significant amounts of claim, and those raising concerns, do we know the actual success rates with satisfactory outcomes? Perhaps the system does a good job with some notable exceptions?
My lay take on court vs adjudication.
What adjudication may do in keeping matters of consumer law out of the courts, aside from reducing the burden, is to avoid legal interpretation of the legislation. This could be both revealing of the short comings of legislation or useful in guiding future complaints to success. In comparison adjudicated outcomes are in general not bound by those in any other decision. One can appeal a court decision, but generally not one that is adjudicated. It may be wise in matters of substantial value to seek in advance appropriate legal advice on the timeliness and likelihood of success of a complaint in either system. Considering the extent of the records of fact one has to back up the negative consumer experience might also be a good starting point.
. Nothing about the process is equitable, it’s a waste of time, energy and expectation for ethical treatment - u get destroyed by a system - stacked by lawyers. So far AFCA appears to be no improvement 