Hi Steve, I moved your post here as there are previous comments about AAMI and others that are relevant.
There is no probably. It is part of their game. One might notice that there are few underwriters and many brand names on their policies, and when getting a quote one is expected to divulge who the current insurance is with. A cynic might think it affects the quote. A realist knows it might affect the quote. An idealist might not have an opinion and trust the system to be unbiased and consistent.
FWIW I tend more toward cynical idealism myself so shop around every year there is more than a minor increase. A few years back I went from AAMI to Allianz and saved a few $100âs, and then bought a car that Allianz seemed not to want to insure as evidenced by the outlandish $ask. Went elsewhere and saved $450 from the Allianz renewal but refused the lowest option since the cheapest underwriter was not worth the risk should I ever need to claim. Allianz was the top dollar option and my response was essentially a âno thank you, stuff your marketing starsâ.
Your $900 differential over 18 months was pretty special. Good on you for ârefusingâ the lazy tax by shopping around.
Dpeter, unfortunately for the consumer it is a common problem. Are you going through their Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) process?
I put in a home building claim with Allianz exactly one year ago and still waiting. Despite going through their IDR process and also lodge a complaint with AFCA, I am still waiting for a final claim amount. First they use delay tactics, then try to put the blame on something else. Next they organised an Engineer who âsat on the fenceâ with the cause and rectification and a guess figure pulled out of who knows where fo the cost to rectify.
My home has significant structural damage, after paying for Engineers for many years to find the cause, I decided to arrange my own CCTV of the underground pipes and found a broken sewer pipe and stormwater pipes. Hence, insurance claim with âescape of liquidâ.
I would of thought it would be an easy process but no, of course not.
Allianz then organised another Engineer for a desktop review of all reports. This took 5 months and the result, âknock down, rebuildâ due to significant structural damage.
There has been constant delays and inconsistencies right from the very beginning and definitely goes against the General Insurance - Code of Practice which I would advise you to read, especially the section on âClaimsâ.
Allianz states in their PDS they 'offer protection for some of the most expensive and precious possession: your building and contents inside themâ. âItâs all about peace of mindâ. âFor most of us, insurance is all about helping us to get a good nightâs sleep - secure in the knowledge that if something goes wrong, we have protection in place to help get through itâ. This is definitely not true in my case, especially when the builder they sent out pointed out two brick walls that were at risk of collapsing.
Good luck with your claim and hope it gets sorted for you soon.
There are many details about your claim that are unreasonable, especially the protracted time span, as well as the seriousness of the structural problem. My problem was finally resolved in August after more than 38 phone calls/emails. I provided high level verbal and written feedback to the NRMA: my criticisms were not of the staff involved - Tandem need more resourcing and networks of tradies etc - but the systems. I was particularly incensed when my claim was listed on the website as finalised - a clear case of deceptive practice. I did submit my feedback through the internal processes but was close to initiating external complaints. In my street there are still two other older, single women whose claims are not finalised from hail storm damage on 20 January. As you wrote, Summergal, one might think think the insurance claim could be resolved without such difficulty: a clear identification and analysis of the problem, then action to resolve this in a timely way. Thanks for your response, Dpeter
About a year or so back, I changed our house and contents insurance to ANZ. Since we travel a lot, I am fairly sure that I would not have used any policy that did not include an away from home component. Of course my memory is not 100% accurate so who knows.
At the beginning of the year, my car was broken into while my daughter had it at her house, and one of our cameras was stolen along with some equipment.
Long story short, when I made a claim regarding the camera, I was told my policy did not have the away from home component and there-fore we were not covered. I disputed this, since when we took out the insurance we didnât really get any specific details about what we had purchased. I told them I was sure I would not have agreed to that if I was told about it on the phone when I made the arrangements in the first place. I was told they would hunt out the recording. AGES later (after two reminders from me) my contact got back to me and said they had found the recording and that I had been informed. I asked to hear the recording. I have been given various reasons for the attempts to send me the recording not working, then finally told I wasnât authorised to hear it!!!
In the meantime, happily the police caught the little ratbags who stole the camera and at least recovered the camera and lens. The other equipment would not amount to more than my excess. I did inform the contact about this, but still received an official note that my claim had been disallowed.
My question is, is that behaviour OK? and surely I should be authorised to hear a recording. My feeling is, that I will change insurer because of this. It leaves a bad taste in myth mouth. I wonder if chasing it down is worth anything, other than the deep satisfaction of a pedant proved correct.
Any suggestions about what possible courses of action I should take - given that I do not want to live in a community/ country where people can be whitewashed like this.
Hi Fred, there is no doubt that the policy is one that doesnât include away from home. My issue is that I do not think this is what I was told on the phone when I purchased the policy and that a conversation to the very opposite effect was had. However the insurance company will not provide me with the recording they say they have of me being told I was purchasing a policy without away from home insurance. Also, the away from home insurance is an opt out condition, so I would have to have been asked. Since they will not allow me access to the recording, I cannot tell if I opted in or out.
Welcome back @kim6, I have moved your topic to this already existing older thread about peopleâs insurance stories as it seems to fit well with the theme of the topic.
Phone calls are a good starting point but they are not satisfactory proof of what was discussed and this is why written complaints are better unless the conversations are recorded. Recordings have lots of legal requirements so if you wish to record ensure you follow the steps to do so legally only and as youâve seen getting the businesses recordings can be a problem.
You can access some free legal advice and perhaps this is a good starting point, on this site we have a small list of some services that might be of assistance to you at Free Legal Advice Centres
Also make a complaint to AFCA, Iâm not suggesting it will be successful but they are the Federal Agency tasked with Insurance and similar Financial complaints.
[Edit: @grahroll posted his while I was typing so please excuse the overlaps.]
My first question is do you have any old policies you can look at to show you had away from home insurance included. If you do, you can then prove that you did have it, and ask why was it removed without your knowledge/consent.
To get the audio recording there are a number of avenues you can take:
Firstly, you can complain to the ANZ Bank. As @Fred123 indicated, you should have a look at your PDS to ensure there is no exclusions to hearing the recording of your exchange with the staff member when you renewed the policy. It is you on the phone after all. Intuitively, I would say you have an absolute right to hear the recording whether or not there is a dispute. Do not expect the âConsumer Advocateâ to act on your behalf as they are an employee, and not independent, though you may get lucky and strike someone who will help.
Secondly, you can lodge a complaint to the Australian Financila Complaints Authority. Do not expect the AFCA to be fair and independent because they are largely industry people who often side with the financial institution. Again, you may get lucky and be helped.
Finally, you can contact a solicitor and have them ask on you behalf.
I think a court would determine that you had a duty to read the PDS, and the PDS is the policy, not whatever was stated on the phone. The theory is probably that you listened to a phone sales pitch, bought the policy but neglected to obtain and read the PDS, and if you had done so you could have cancelled during the cooling off period.
@grahrollâs and @meltamâs advice is right on, and as regard the recording, you might seek a more senior person to talk to, and ask for them to deny your access in writing (so you can make a formal complaint through the ACCC/fair trading/AFCA) with their reasons.
It could be amusing if we all started answering âdo you mind if we record this call for training blah blahâ with âonly under the conditions you and your employer commit to providing me unedited copy in a timely manner should there ever be a disputeâŠâ
Hi Summergal. I have experienced âidenticalâ treatment, for a 100,000+ litre pipe burst at my property, by CGU. Please, donât waste your time with A.F.C.A (funded by Insurers and Banks)âŠget your Court writ lodged, and âmentionâ in IT, not only the breach of Code of Conduct, but their failure of âDuty of utmost good faithâ, and breach of Contract. Writ lodgement is where I am now at, SIX YEARS down the track of their internal Complaints resolution, then A.F.C.Aâs 3 year drag alongâŠsoâŠhow did you goâŠresolved yet?..and sorry, I am new to this forumâŠ
We are currently insured with Budget Direct & our policy is due to expire at the end of this month. We received our new renewal offer and to my horror our premiums had increased by nearly $700. I did a search on insurance reviews and found that Australian Seniors Insurance was just below our last years premium and this was with increased house & contents cover. I rang Budget Direct customer support and queried the premium and told them I was disgusted with the increase. After a bit of a wait the customer support person said they would reduce the premium. When the email arrived with the new quote, it was an increase of $3.70 on last years premium, which was still slightly dearer than the Australian Seniors quote. It amazes me that BD can reduce the quote, but if I hadnât complained they would have happily taken the extra. After this experience I have completely lost trust with them and decided to change our insurance to Australian Seniors as they seem to have very good customer feedback, hopefully this is the right decision.
I have an extremely low opinion of this lot, especially after the puerile TV ads they have persisted in running for years, ranging from the idiot who gave his farming property to his kids but needs a furneral insurance policy and is excited to get a $25 âgiftâ card throught to the senile fool who bunny hops backwards up a flight of stairs whilst holding a drink mug in each hand.
I just tried to get a home & contents insurance quote but as soon as I entered our address in Cairns, they ran away.
Insurance, thereâs a first time for everyone!
It pays to shop around, although the cheapest does not always offer the best service. Nor are all policies equal.
Since the rewriting of insurance risks across the north of Australia, there are few insurance virgins to be taken. Southern investors buying in Cairns etc during Covid using agentâs video walk throughs might be the next to feel the pain. A faint hope it might create some greater pressure for positive change.
Hi @johana3 , welcome to the community and your contribution.
If you search the community, there are other examples where companies charge significantly more for renewals, when cheaper offerings are available to new customers. It is often called a âloyaltyâ or âlazyâ taxâ. Loyalty as many consumer assume that the company will do the right thing by them being an existing customer and âlazyâ, because many consumers donât check renewals and automatically pay them when they are received.
If you peruse those 5-star accolades you will notice a very large number are âeasy to buyâ, âhelpful sales person explained policyâ, âgood web siteâ, âsaved some moneyâ and similar - not so many about claims experiences.
I recently had my car and house insurances fall due close together. I have decided to stick with GIO as I am comfortable with that company and I have noticed that remaining with the same insurer does create extra discounts. In the past I have happily gone with the best deal I can find. Now I just go with GIO, BUT I do still check other insurers as a check, and I do call GIO to get âprice matchingâ!
This year I found that NRMA had lower cost, but before I rang GIO I did an âonline quoteâ to see if that gave a better deal. I was not sure what level of cover I had when I did the quote, so I tried the âClassic Extrasâ and found that it was about $70 cheaper than my renewal notice, which I then noticed was only at âClassicâ level, which is the cheapest level.
So, I rang GIO and changed over to âClassic Extrasâ at the lower cost and more âextrasâ. I was told the there was âa special dealâ for âClassic Extrasâ making it cheaper!
So, the lesson is: always check online offers before paying renewal of insurance!
Insurance, thereâs a first time for everyone!