Privacy Rights Prevail: Claimant Sets Precedent in Insurance Information Access Dispute

3

The claim originates from an incident in January when the traveler's belongings, including a bag, were stolen during an overseas trip. In response, SCTI requested a standard consent from the policyholder to acquire "any further information reasonably required" for their investigations.

The claimant, however, raised privacy concerns and proposed a modified consent form. His version mandated that SCTI summarize any information they intended to retrieve and secure written consent before sharing it with third parties.

Insisting on his privacy, the claimant also declined to share his phone number, preferring to handle communications through email, which SCTI found insufficient for the investigation process.

The insurer argued that under the terms and conditions agreed upon by the policyholder at the time of purchase, such an authorization was necessary to ensure comprehensive investigations without any limitations. SCTI warned they could not advance the claim unless the policyholder complied with their request.

On the contrary, the claimant contended that his modifications wouldn't hinder SCTI's access but would merely control the flow of his personal data. He asserted it was unreasonable for SCTI to gather information without his explicit acknowledgment, citing concerns over what he termed as "easily breachable" information.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) sided with the claimant, emphasizing the need to balance the claimant’s privacy with the insurer's requirement for a thorough investigation.

AFCA noted that SCTI’s request was quite broad, lacking specificity about the necessity of each piece of information. The authority pointed out SCTI's failure to demonstrate any substantial prejudice caused by limiting authority over the claimant's information.

"While requesting limited authority/ies from the complainant presents a greater administrative and time burden for the insurer, it has not shown that doing so would inhibit its ability to investigate the claim or is otherwise unworkable or particularly onerous," the ombudsman remarked.

The ombudsman further commented, "In the absence of the insurer providing reasons to the contrary, the complainant is entitled to know the parties to whom information is being provided to and sought from, its scope, and the opportunity to consent to each."

Thus, SCTI cannot delay claim assessments on the grounds of incomplete standard authorization forms, obliging them to provide the claimant with forms that recognize his conditions.

AFCA also determined that while the claimant may continue using email for routine communication, he must supply his phone number or relevant phone records if deemed vital to the investigation. This case underlines the evolving dynamics between privacy rights and corporate processes, as reported by Insurance News.

Published:Monday, 25th Nov 2024
Source: Paige Estritori

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

Potential AI Errors: A Looming Challenge for Insurers 24 Apr 2025: Paige Estritori Industry experts are signaling a potential risk for underwriters due to claims arising from inaccuracies produced by artificial intelligence (AI), likening it to the 'silent cyber' phenomenon of the past. Clyde & Co partner, Darryl Smith, highlights the issue, emphasizing how AI inaccuracies could impact various insurance policies, sometimes without immediate detection. - read more

AFCA Supports RAA Insurance in Vehicle Location Dispute 24 Apr 2025: Paige Estritori An insurance dispute over the location of a vehicle culminated in the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) backing RAA Insurance in their decision to deny a claim. The issue surrounded the policyholder's claim that her son’s car was stored in South Australia, while the vehicle was allegedly used and registered in Victoria. - read more

AFCA Sides with Homeowners in Landmark Insurance Dispute Over Property Cracks 22 Apr 2025: Paige Estritori Homeowners recently secured a favourable ruling against their insurer after a water leak led to significant structural damage. After large cracks emerged on their property, Youi initially denied the insurance claim, attributing the damage to pre-existing issues like earth movement and tree root intrusion, both of which are exclusions in their policy. - read more

Climate Change Threatens Australian Suburbs with Unaffordable Insurance 17 Apr 2025: Paige Estritori More than 4% of Australian properties are currently facing heightened risks from natural hazards exacerbated by climate change, rendering insurance coverage often unaffordable or unavailable, according to recent findings by Climate Valuation. An analysis of over 15 million properties across 15,000 suburbs also highlights that an additional 10% are at moderate risk from disasters such as floods, bushfires, tropical cyclones, coastal inundation, and extreme winds. - read more

Insurer Rejects Claim Over Diesel Fluid Mix-Up 16 Apr 2025: Paige Estritori A contentious insurance claim has ended unfavourably for a motor policyholder after her husband mistakenly poured diesel exhaust fluid into her car's fuel tank. Although the policyholder initially received assurances from a Suncorp representative that the use of AdBlue fluid wouldn't be considered improper fuelling – supposedly an excluded scenario under her policy – the claim was later denied. This decision has sparked debate around policy definitions and customer service communication. - read more

ASIC Takes Hollard Insurance to Court Over Significant Claim Handling Issues 14 Apr 2025: Paige Estritori The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has initiated legal proceedings in the Federal Court against Hollard Insurance, alleging a breach of the duty of utmost good faith. This action is in response to what ASIC describes as Hollard's 'egregious' handling of a home and contents insurance claim filed by a couple from regional Victoria. - read more