Academics say disaster claims handling may not meet industry code

Melbourne Law School academics say interviews with unsatisfied claimants raise questions about whether insurer claims handling following severe weather is consistent with General Insurance Code of Practice requirements.

Insurers are required to respond to catastrophes “efficiently, professionally, practically and compassionately,” clause 88 of the Code says.

Research Fellow Evgenia Bourova says these expectations are often not met when insurers receive tens of thousands of claims in a short period of time, “subjecting policyholders to burdensome processes beset by poor communication and delays”.

The academics interviewed 30 policyholders undertaking legal advice over their claims outcomes. They relayed “arduous and confusing” insurer handling processes.

The top complaint was poor communication, with delays, obscure policy wording, “loopholes”, inadequate cash settlements and “just layers of buffer” also causing anxiety.

Ms Bourova tells insuranceNEWS.com.au that while insurers face genuine issues after disasters, there is still an “adequate standard” of claims handling that customers should be able to expect.

“They just want to know that their claim hasn’t fallen into a black hole,” she said. “People who did have a consistent person to talk to – it made a big difference to them.

“Maybe insurers do need to employ more staff so that an adequate standard can be maintained even after major catastrophes.”

For some survivors, the “adversarial” claims process was the most distressing element of their recovery, the research paper said.

There is “clearly scope for insurers to review disaster claims handling processes to re-centre the experiences of policyholders as survivors navigating multiple stressors,” it said. It also wants reforms requiring insurers to provide information so policyholders can determine whether to accept a cash settlement offer.

The researchers concede the study is not representative because of the small sample size and focus on claimants whose experiences were “sufficiently negative” to warrant seeking legal advice.

They also said it may be impossible for insurers to avoid delays within flood or bushfire-affected areas during high demand for third party assessors and tradespeople, or shortages of temporary accommodation.

See ANALYSIS.