By Paul Muir, MD at Compliance Advocacy Solutions

Claims professionals are the cornerstone of the insurance industry. Always have been. Always will be.

Yet some can feel like modern-day Sisyphus figures, pushing a rock uphill, day after day, as they navigate complex claims, competing demands and distressed customers. Paid advocates can find themselves pushing the same rock from the customer’s side.

This raises a question that should sit at the centre of the debate about claimant intermediaries: why does a customer believe they need to pay a third party to obtain a fair outcome under an insurance policy for which they have already paid a premium?

Does that mean the claims system is broken? The existence of paid advocacy alone does not establish that. Complex claims can require specialist help even within a well-functioning system. But when customers seek assistance because they feel unheard, overwhelmed or unable to challenge an assessment, we should examine what their experience tells us.

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s 2026-27 general insurance priorities include a review of for-profit claims management companies, following concerns raised by insurers and consumer advocates. Its focus includes client acquisition, fees, cancellation arrangements and supplier relationships. That provides an opportunity to understand both consumer risks and the role these businesses play.

We should distinguish professional claimant intermediaries operating under an appropriately authorised Australian financial services licence from predatory conduct commonly described as storm or disaster chasing.

One describes a regulated service; the other describes behaviour. They are not interchangeable, and licensing does not guarantee good conduct. Nor should roofers and builders be characterised as disaster chasers simply because they work after a catastrophe. The questions are what they do, how they approach customers and whose interests their arrangements serve.

There is also a practical difference between helping someone lodge a straightforward claim and helping resolve a disputed, delayed or potentially underpaid one.

I support the role of professional claimant intermediaries in helping customers secure fair outcomes, particularly when claims become complex, disputed or overwhelming. An advocate may help test a repair scope, obtain technical evidence, interpret policy terms or challenge an assessment. For a family displaced from home and navigating a water damage or mould dispute, that assistance can reduce the administrative and emotional burden.

Insurers appropriately draw on loss adjusters, engineers, repairers and other specialists. It is understandable that a customer facing the same technical complexity may also want expertise on their side.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority provides free, independent dispute resolution, and consumers do not need paid representation to use it. That is an essential protection. However, access to a free process does not mean every customer feels equipped to organise evidence or explain a complex dispute. Paid help may add value in some cases; customers should understand the free alternatives before committing.

Effective advocacy can also help customers understand the limits of their policy, distinguish supportable concerns from unrealistic expectations and reach resolution sooner. Supporting someone through distress is valuable, while recognising when qualified counselling or other specialist support is needed.

The comparison with insurance brokers is instructive. Brokers operating under an AFSL are paid for expertise, access and assistance, including claims support. We recognise that remuneration can coexist with consumer benefit.

Should we apply the same reasoning to licensed claimant intermediaries? Their authorisations and services differ, but both should be assessed on competence, conduct, conflicts and value. Are we focusing too heavily on how advocates are paid, and too little on what customers receive?

Remuneration still matters. A percentage fee can reduce the funds available for repairs. It may also create incentives around settlement size or cash outcomes. The relevant question is whether the customer is demonstrably better off after fees, with a clear understanding of costs, alternatives and commercial relationships. A larger settlement alone does not answer that question.

Licence obligations – including providing services efficiently, honestly and fairly, and adequately managing conflicts – provide important guardrails. A claimant intermediaries representative industry body and a dedicated code could build on them through practical standards, transparent fees, vulnerability support and credible disciplinary processes.

The objective should be a common customer goal: fair, timely resolution under the policy. That requires room for professional advocacy, accountability for poor conduct and constructive engagement between everyone involved.

The question remains: why does the customer believe they need to pay again to secure the promise they have already purchased?

By Alex Acworth, insurance and retirement savings lead, Accenture

For the past few years, much of the conversation about AI in insurance has focused on what the technology can automate. But as adoption grows, insurers need to decide how that freed-up time should be used. 

The productivity gains are already becoming tangible. Accenture research found that 81% of insurers have achieved at least a 5% improvement in gross written premiums from data and AI initiatives. At the same time, 86% of insurance employees say AI tools have increased their overall productivity.

For insurers, the real benefit comes from redirecting that time towards work that improves the business and customer experience.

Insurance depends heavily on specialist expertise. Underwriters need to understand increasingly complex risks. Claims professionals need to interpret information and support customers, often at difficult moments. Brokers and distribution teams need to build relationships and understand the needs of increasingly sophisticated customers.

Yet highly skilled people still spend a significant proportion of their working day on tasks that do not make the best use of that expertise.

Accenture research into underwriting, for example, has found that around 40% of an average underwriter's time is spent on administrative and other non-core tasks. AI can help reduce that burden by extracting information from submission documents, bringing together relevant data and presenting it to an underwriter in a usable format.

Processing a submission faster is only part of the benefit. It also gives underwriters more capacity to assess complex risks, work with brokers and customers, and pursue opportunities that might otherwise be missed.

Turning productivity into customer value

Claims and customer service stand to benefit in much the same way.

In claims, AI can help gather and summarise information, surface relevant policy information and support employees managing workflows.

In customer service, it can help resolve routine enquiries and give employees faster access to the information they need. That gives employees more time to handle the complex or sensitive interactions that need that human touch.

This is particularly relevant in Australia, where customer communication, support for vulnerable customers and appropriate claims-handling resources remain important priorities for insurers and regulators.

AI could help insurers give their employees more time for this work; if technology can reduce the administrative workload surrounding a claim, for example, claims professionals can spend more time communicating with customers, managing complex cases and applying their experience where human judgment matters.

There is a commercial benefit to getting those interactions right too. Accenture research found that 47% of customers dissatisfied with how their claim was handled were considering switching insurers.

Insurers should therefore measure productivity by more than cost savings. If AI gives a claims professional more time to communicate with a customer, an underwriter greater capacity to examine a complex risk or a service employee the information required to resolve an enquiry more effectively, that productivity can translate into stronger customer relationships and better business outcomes.

The next challenge is scaling what works

Many insurers have already shown that individual AI tools can deliver value. The harder task is embedding them across the business in a meaningful way.

Accenture research found just 23% of insurers have achieved enterprise-wide AI integration. At the same time, 83% report moderate-to-severe gaps in the skills required to translate between AI capabilities and business needs.

This suggests the next phase should not be about deploying AI everywhere simply because the technology is available.

Instead, insurers should begin by identifying the specific problem they want to solve first: identifying where employees lose time gathering information, where fragmented systems cause customer delays, and where manual processes prevent people from making timely decisions or pursuing new opportunities. 

By addressing the issue at its heart, insurers can shift the focus from automating individual tasks to revolutionising how work gets done across the business.

The people best placed to identify valuable applications of AI are often those who understand the work most deeply. Underwriters, claims professionals, actuaries and distribution teams need enough understanding of AI to identify where it can improve their workflows, challenge its outputs and determine where human judgement remains essential.

That becomes even more important as agentic AI develops. Accenture research found 68% of insurance leaders believe integrating AI agents into core workflows will transform roles.

But insurers should not judge progress by the number of processes they automate. Instead, it should be whether AI helps the organisation make better decisions, respond to customers more effectively, pursue more opportunities and make better use of the expertise already inside the business.

Ultimately, the real productivity gain from AI will come when skilled employees spend less time on admin and more time making decisions, solving problems and supporting customers.

The rush by developers to enter Australia’s data centre boom risks contractual frameworks being left behind, the Australasian Professional Indemnity Group (APIG) annual conference was warned.

Australia is already the world’s second biggest data centre investment destination behind the US, with $6.7bn spent in 2025, and in a panel session, Iain Drennan, head of Australasian construction at WTW, tipped this to “accelerate in multitudes” over the next three to five years.

But while the country’s data centre journey is exciting, he says the rapid expansion draws uncomfortable parallels with the renewable energy boom 10 years ago, “where everyone was racing to build solar and the like”. 

“In that instance the contractual framework throughout the chain took a while to catch up and I’m seeing that in the data centre space.

“Whether you’re a developer, a hyperscaler, a head contractor, a sub-contractor – everyone’s rushing to get a piece of this pie. From a contractual allocation framework perspective, I see that we’re probably not quite there yet. Probably several years away from it.”

Alicia Albury, property lawyer at White & Case agreed that “we’re so early in our data centre journey in Australia that we haven’t even really worked out yet what asset class data centres fall into”.

“It feels all of a sudden data centres are their own asset class and people are scrambling to work out what the market means and how we treat them from an investment and development perspective.

“And added to that we have two types of developer. The traditional property developers who are moving into data centre development and energy players who are looking at it as an energy infrastructure project and those two groups speak a different language.”

Swiss Re’s Andre Martin said from an insurer’s perspective the main issue is the eco-system surrounding data centres, including heavy assets such as power plants and cooling plants.

“The concern for us is how do we get our heads round the interdependencies of all these systems?

It’s a combination of scale, speed and technology and everything happens at the same time,” he said.

Mr Martin added that while the US clusters are far bigger, the scale of value concentration in the Australian centres is an issue. He also warned of “design accumulation” where one fault in design could impact multiple data centres.

Ms Albury said from a real estate point of view, there has been a big power shift from traditional real estate leases, where a landlord’s obligations are fairly passive, to the service agreements being pushed for in Australia by hyperscalers, where landlords’ risks are a lot higher. She said their obligations are detailed, tested, monitored and measured continuously.

“Those obligations are owed 24 hours a day, seven days a week to the tenant and there’s a pre-agreed amount of penalty that’s applied and it’s reduced from the recurrent fee which is a form of rent. So there’s no certainty of rent coming in and the hyperscaler tenant has termination rights they just wouldn’t have under a traditional lease scenario.”

WTW’s Mr Drennan warned of significant potential exposure for contractors, both due to the value of server racks in data centres and the large liability caps they face.

“Contractually they’re almost never responsible for the installation of the server racks but there is often overlap between the sort of routine practical completion and the installation of the server racks so you’ve obviously got damage possibility. If damage occurs because of professional error in the design and contract phase, it can be huge.

“Most importantly, we almost always see that insurance proceeds in no way shape or form reduce that liability cap. So it’s a liability cap on top of insurance processes, but very large exposure for our clients.”

Swiss Re’s Mr Martin said there is currently little experience in terms of PI claims in the sector, but determining what actually constituted professional negligence would be a challenge because the standards and technology are so quickly evolving.

“What was best standard yesterday is already outdated tomorrow. So the [first] question is what would the competent professional have done or known at the time he provided the advice? The second is more about attribution in this complex ecosystem you have – who is responsible for the failure? In a cooling plant, that could have originated in the installation, the design, engineering, manufacturing, maintenance, operations. Where does it actually originate?”

Mr Drennan said contractors are not taking out project-specific PI policies and are just relying on their annual insurance programs being sufficient for billion-dollar projects.

“Is 10, 20, 50 million dollars enough? I don’t think we’ve given due thought about the adequacy of those. Is it just a drop in the ocean?”

He also questioned whether current insurance products adequately addressed the intersection of property damage and cyber incidents.

By Michael McNamara, head of aviation, QBE

Australia’s aviation sector is on the cusp of its biggest transformation in decades.

The layer of airspace above our homes, businesses, farms, infrastructure and communities – low enough to feel local, yet increasingly important to economic activity – is fast becoming part of the national infrastructure debate. And the opportunity is significant.

More than 40,000 remote pilot licences are already active across the country, supporting everything from crop and livestock monitoring to construction site mapping and emergency services. Electric vertical take-off and landing aircraft (eVTOLs) are also moving closer to commercial deployment.

Together, these technologies are driving the emergence of a low-altitude economy.

The question is no longer whether these technologies will arrive, but how we integrate them safely into an increasingly complex aviation ecosystem.

Through 65 years of underwriting aviation insurance in Australia, QBE has had a front-row seat to that evolution, and the vital role aviation plays in connecting communities, supporting businesses and enabling economic activity across the country.

What makes today's transition different is the combination of technology and scale.

Historically, aviation risk has been relatively well understood, supported by decades of operational experience, data and established safety frameworks. This next phase introduces a very different challenge – a larger and more diverse group of operators, rapidly evolving technologies, and far greater interaction with communities and critical infrastructure.

Drones, and soon eVTOLs, will increasingly operate alongside traditional aircraft in shared airspace, creating new risks involving airspace conflicts, infrastructure interaction, cyber vulnerabilities, battery failures and more complex liability exposures.

As these technologies become more common across cities, regions and essential industries, the consequences of not managing these risks extend well beyond the aircraft itself. A single incident could disrupt transport networks, emergency services, critical infrastructure or commercial activity.

We’re already seeing examples of what this looks like in practice. Recent incidents have involved drones – from collisions with firefighting aircraft to ignition events during agricultural operations. These are not theoretical scenarios; they are early indicators of the risks emerging within this new ecosystem.

CASA's Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) and Advanced Air Mobility Strategic Regulatory Roadmap recognises this challenge and the need to integrate these technologies safely into Australia's aviation system.

For insurers, this means moving beyond legacy assumptions about risk. It requires a forward-looking approach that considers emerging risks, technological change and how aircraft are operated.

So how do we ensure the low-altitude economy delivers on its promise while maintaining the safety standards that underpin Australian aviation?

First, we need sustained collaboration.

Australia is well placed in this regard, with highly engaged industry associations, regulators, operators and insurers already working together to support the safe growth of the UAV and advanced air mobility sectors.

As these technologies move towards wider adoption, maintaining and strengthening that engagement will be critical to ensuring innovation keeps pace with safety, operational and community expectations.

Insurers also have an important role to play. We see how risks emerge across different operators, technologies and operating environments, giving us a unique perspective on where vulnerabilities and trends are developing. Sharing those insights can help inform practical approaches to certification, operating standards and risk controls across the industry.

Secondly, we need to prepare for scale.

When drones first entered the market, they were largely accommodated within existing aviation frameworks. As the sector matured, dedicated regulations, accreditation and licensing requirements, and specialised insurance solutions emerged alongside it.

CASA's roadmap anticipates advanced air mobility operations emerging in Australia between 2027 and 2029 and identifies scale as a defining challenge, with RPAS already operating in greater numbers than existing airspace users combined.

This means successful deployment won't depend on the aircraft alone, but on whether the systems around them keep pace and how they integrate with existing aviation infrastructure.

For insurers, preparing for scale also means ensuring underwriting frameworks, data capabilities and risk models evolve alongside the sector. As operations become more widespread, insurers will need a deeper understanding of factors such as cyber resilience, battery performance, automation and infrastructure interaction to accurately assess risk, price coverage and support innovation.

Building that evidence base early will help ensure insurance remains an effective enabler of growth as the sector matures.

Finally, we need to educate.

One of the ongoing challenges in the sector has been the number of new entrants without a traditional aviation background – many now coming from industries such as agriculture, construction or logistics. Ensuring operators understand their responsibilities particularly around certification and safe use of shared airspace will remain a key part of managing risk as the sector grows.

More broadly, insurance has long helped businesses adopt new technologies by making risk better understood, more manageable and transferable. That role will become increasingly important as low-altitude aviation continues to evolve.

Ultimately, the low-altitude economy is not just about new aircraft. It is about building an ecosystem that allows innovation to scale safely and sustainably.

In a country as large and geographically diverse as Australia, these technologies have the potential to strengthen regional connectivity, support emergency services and improve access to essential services.

Businesses and communities will only embrace these technologies at scale if they have confidence the risks can be understood and managed. Insurance has helped build that confidence through generations of technological change and will continue to play an important role as the next chapter of aviation takes shape.

By Tim Wills, head of marine – Australia, Markel

Geopolitical instability has brought marine war risk back into sharper focus, but the conversation continues to evolve. Marine war risk is becoming increasingly complex, with exposures extending well beyond physical damage and requiring a broader understanding of how conflict, regulation and global trade intersect. 

For brokers, insurers and insureds, the challenge is no longer simply assessing the likelihood of a vessel or cargo being affected by conflict, it's understanding the potential wider operational, financial and regulatory consequences that can emerge when global events disrupt the movement of goods. 

Recent years have demonstrated just how quickly disruption can ripple through global supply chains, whether triggered by conflict, geopolitical tension or a pandemic. Conflict can increase fuel costs, disrupt shipping routes and place additional strain on freight networks, creating significant challenges for businesses engaged in international trade.

Looking beyond physical damage 

For many clients, physical damage tends to dominate the conversation around marine war risk. In practice, it is often the less visible exposures that create the greatest disruption. 

Consider a vessel held at a port outside a conflict zone while the shipowners weigh up whether to transit a high-risk chokepoint. The vessel may be undamaged, but the consequences are mounting: delayed cargo delivery, additional crew costs, supply chain disruption and growing pressure on business continuity. What begins as a logistical challenge can quickly become a significant operational and financial issue. Uncertainty around the safe and timely movement of goods can not only undermine confidence across an entire supply chain but may also significantly increase the cost of carriage and/or severely limit the capacity and availability of services. 

War-related losses increasingly arise not from physical cargo damage, but from shipping companies using contractual rights to change routes, discharge cargo elsewhere, delay journeys or pass on additional forwarding costs. 

Businesses are often required to make decisions before the full picture has emerged. Rapid reporting cycles, evolving intelligence and shifting circumstances can create uncertainty at precisely the moment when clear judgement is needed most. 

There is also a human dimension. Prolonged disruption can make crew rotation and repatriation difficult, leaving seafarers onboard for extended periods with no clear timetable for relief. The welfare implications can be considerable and often sit alongside the commercial consequences of disruption. 

Where the real cost often lies 

• Forwarding and rerouting expenses when carriers exercise their rights to avoid conflict zones and terminate a voyage before the intended destination, leaving cargo to be moved on at additional cost.
• Delay costs from port congestion, route diversions, inspections and security measures.
• Detention and port holding expenses where vessels or cargo are held up by sanctions reviews, security concerns or regulatory intervention.
• Additional freight and logistics costs from reduced capacity and longer routes, for example rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope.
• Sanctions and compliance costs of keeping transactions, payments and cargo movements compliant with changing requirements.
• Supply chain disruption costs affecting the movement of goods, inventory management and business continuity. 

When operational issues become regulatory issues 

Exposures are not always defined by what happens on the water. Permissions, approvals, contractual obligations and sanctions considerations can all come into play. As geopolitical tensions evolve, businesses can find themselves managing legal, operational and reputational considerations simultaneously. 

Recent developments illustrate how quickly the environment can shift. In July, the Lloyd’s Market Association published a new model clause addressing payments made for vessels to transit the Strait of Hormuz, reflecting the growing intersection of sanctions, regulation and routine voyage decisions. In simple terms, the clause makes clear that insurers will not cover those payments and that cover for the relevant vessel may cease if such a payment is made, because of the potential sanctions and terrorism-law implications.  

It is a clear example of how operational challenges can quickly become regulatory challenges, with a routing decision, port call or payment instruction carrying consequences beyond the voyage itself.  

Marine war risk was traditionally viewed through the lens of state-on-state conflict. Today, the landscape is often more complex, involving a wider range of actors, competing geopolitical interests and tactics that can blur traditional definitions of conflict. From the perspective of businesses and their advisers, this can make risk assessment more complicated and layered. Emerging technologies also add complexity. The objective is not to predict every new threat, but to understand how geopolitical and technological developments may influence exposures over time. 

Why experience matters 

In marine war insurance, experience is more than a differentiator, it is a risk management tool. When events move quickly, it is depth of knowledge that allows a considered response rather than a reactive one.  

That knowledge is rarely built on a single event or market. It accumulates across regions and cycles of disruption, drawing on real-time geopolitical intelligence and longstanding relationships. The value lies in the ability to read an emerging situation quickly and help clients make informed decisions while circumstances are still shifting.  

Experience also supports consistency. Periods of uncertainty can trigger sharp swings in market sentiment, underwriting appetite and pricing. For brokers and insureds, confidence tends to come from working with partners who take a disciplined, long-term view and hold their nerve when conditions change. 

For brokers and risk advisers, the key takeaway is that resilience planning deserves increased attention. 

In fast-moving situations, businesses are often faced with conflicting information about whether a route is open, restricted or effectively closed. Cutting through that noise is difficult in isolation. This is where partnership matters: insurers, brokers and clients sharing intelligence and insight builds a clearer, more comprehensive picture than any party could form alone.  

Marine war insurance is no longer solely about responding when something goes wrong. Increasingly, it is about helping businesses navigate uncertainty, understand interconnected risks and make informed decisions in an environment where geopolitical developments can have far-reaching consequences.

Suncorp has said in response to an Australian Securities Exchange price query that it is not in discussions regarding a takeover and that it has not received an offer.

The company says it is not aware of any information concerning it that has not been announced to the market which, if known by some in the market, could explain the recent trading in its securities. 

“Suncorp is aware of a speculative article published in the online [edition] of The Australian newspaper headlined ‘Tokio Marine and Suncorp said to have held preliminary takeover talks’,” it says. 

“This article was published shortly before the increase in Suncorp’s share price and trading volumes. Suncorp confirms that it is not in discussions regarding a takeover and that it has not received a takeover offer.” 

The Australian had reported in July that Tokio Marine was interested in Suncorp and IAG, while an article published online yesterday said that “Suncorp is understood to have entered preliminary discussions” with Tokio Marine, and executives had travelled to Japan for talks, but it was “understood that as of last week there had yet to be any formal inbound proposal”. 

The UK’s Financial Times also in August reported that Suncorp was the preferred target for Tokio Marine. That article said the Japanese insurer had also looked at IAG and Canada's Intact Financial Corporation.

Suncorp shares closed up 4.8% at $19.97 yesterday.
 

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has opposed IAG’s planned $1.35 billion purchase of WA’s RAC Insurance, but the company will continue to pursue deal approval through a new public interest avenue introduced this year.  

ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb says the regulator conducted extensive inquiries and analysed material provided by IAG, RAC and third parties such as other insurers and industry associations to examine the likely impacts on competition.

“The acquisition would combine two large insurers, resulting in a substantial increase in IAG’s market share and a significant increase in market concentration,” Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. 

“If the acquisition were to proceed, we consider the level of constraint from other insurers would be unlikely to be sufficient to address the loss of competition arising from the acquisition.” 

It found the proposed deal would leave IAG with overall market shares in WA of approximately 55% to 65% in motor vehicle and about 50% to 60% in home and contents. 

Under the new merger regulation regime, if the ACCC decides not to approve an acquisition, the parties can lodge an additional public benefit application and the regulator then has 50 business days to make a decision, subject to any extensions. 

IAG confirmed this morning that it would make a public benefits application, which provides an opportunity for the broader benefits of the alliance to be assessed alongside competition considerations 

“The RAC IAG partnership will create long-term benefits for members, customers and communities across Western Australia through IAG’s advanced technology platforms, claims management expertise, financial stability and global reinsurance protection,” CEO Nick Hawkins said. 

“RAC will remain local and we’ll invest in enhancements to benefit the member experience, and continue to deliver high-quality, competitive insurance products and services."

The ACCC had already raised concerns about the deal in April, before it progressed to a more detailed second phase review.

The phase two determination can be read here.

QBE has promoted Jonathan Groves to the role of CEO Australia Pacific to replace the retiring Sue Houghton. 

Mr Groves has more than 30 years’ industry experience and joined QBE in 2013 as chief risk officer of Equator Re. He was QBE's chief risk officer for Australia and New Zealand before being appointed CEO and MD of the Pacific business in 2024. Prior to QBE, he worked with AIG, Marsh and Aon. 

Group CEO Andrew Horton says Mr Groves brings deep knowledge of QBE, its Australia Pacific business and the customers and partners it serves. 

“He is well placed to build on the strong foundations of the business and continue delivering for customers, brokers, partners and shareholders,” he said. 

“Australia Pacific is a strong business with a clear strategy and significant opportunities ahead. I look forward to working closely with Jonathan as we continue to build on the momentum underway across the division.” 

Mr Groves will start his new role on November 1, reporting to Mr Horton. He will be based in Sydney. 

“It is a privilege to be appointed Chief Executive Officer of QBE Australia Pacific,” he said today. “I am confident in the strength of this business, the expertise of our people and the value of the relationships we have with our customers, brokers and partners.” 

As insuranceNEWS.com.au has reported, Ms Houghton plans to retire at the end of the year after more than five years in the role.

Cyber specialist Emergence Insurance has expanded into the US, targeting a coverage gap among SMEs.

“Cyber risk is now part of everyday operating risk, yet many organisations still do not have dedicated cyber insurance because it is often viewed as complex, specialist or difficult to access,” CEO Troy Filipcevic said today.

“Our focus is to help change that perception by making cyber insurance simpler, more practical and more clearly connected to the way organisations manage risk every day.”

Emergence’s US operations will be led by Keith Savino, a cyber insurance leader with relationships across brokers, agents and the broader market.

“Keith has the market knowledge, relationships and leadership capability we need to build Emergence US the right way,” Mr Filipcevic said.

“Just as importantly, he shares our view of what brokers, agents and clients require.”

Sydney-based Emergence, founded in 2015, has operated in Australia and New Zealand, providing cyber cover, risk support and incident response.

Mr Filipcevic says the expansion will enhance Emergence’s ability to support local organisations moving into the US, and strengthen its overall product capability.

“Our approach to the US is deliberate,” he said. “We will grow with intention, stay true to our core values and continue to build a reputation for reliability, expertise and genuine support in cyber insurance.”

The NSW government has launched a review of the icare workers’ compensation premium model, which applies to more than 340,000 employers.

The three-stage review begins today with a consultation period, followed by a spell of model testing, validation and recommendations.  

The introduction of a new model will be subject to final recommendations and approvals. 

“We have heard the calls from small businesses and not-for-profits that the workers’ compensation premium model needs to be reviewed, and the NSW government has listened,” Work Health and Safety Minister Sophie Cotsis said today. 

“We are committed to ensuring the workers’ compensation scheme that supports millions of workers is sustainable.” 

The review aims to assess whether the current model remains fit for purpose; check the balance between premium responsiveness and stability; improve transparency and predictability; enhance incentives for injury prevention and return to work outcomes; and support long-term scheme sustainability. 

The first two phases are expected to take about 18 months. 

Business NSW says the cost and complexity of the workers’ compensation system is a challenge for many members. 

“We need to avoid high premiums that are forcing more businesses to scale back operations just to stay afloat,” a spokesperson said.

“Reforming the way workers’ compensation premiums are calculated is a crucial step in not only restoring fairness to the system, but also ensuring our economy grows.”

NSW Council of Social Service CEO Cara Varian says the current model assumes employers can absorb or recover premium increases.

“Most community organisations cannot do this, as they deliver services under government contracts at a fixed price – nine in 10 organisations report that their costs rise faster than their funding,” she said.

A consultation survey can be completed here until October 25. 

IAG expects to lodge a public benefits application with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in the next few days as it pursues approval for its RAC Insurance acquisition.

ACCC blocked the deal last month, but a process introduced this year allows companies to ask for an additional assessment taking the wider public interest into account.

Companies can have the decision reviewed by the Australian Competition Tribunal if the deal continues to be blocked.

IAG and RAC have already lodged applications with the tribunal to keep that option open, with the process to be suspended until after the ACCC makes its final decision.

The tribunal on Friday said the two companies estimate the ACCC, at the latest, will probably make a public benefit determination by the beginning of February, and based on that timing a review hearing cannot happen before the end of March.

Justice Michael O’Bryan directed that the proceeding be listed for 12 days including March 30 to April 2, April 5-8 and April 12-15.

The tribunal would include Justice Cameron Moore, Ms Diana Eilert and Professor Flavio Menezes.

The IAG and RAC applications would be heard together, with one fee payable.

“If the commission makes a public benefit determination … that the notified acquisition would be of public benefit, the applicants intend to discontinue this proceeding,” Justice O’Bryan said.

IAG announced the proposed $1.35 billion takeover of the RAC underwriting operations – along with a 20-year distribution agreement – in May last year.

Entrepreneur and TV personality Nick Bell has posted a wanted ad seeking a Melbourne-based insurance broker partner for a new venture.

The Shark Tank judge, who has founded and sold many businesses, says he is looking for a partner to help build a $200 million brokerage in four years.

“I don’t care if you’re 25 or 45. I care about your hunger, ability and ambition. You don’t need someone to motivate you. You’re already obsessed with winning,” a LinkedIn post says. “An ambitious commercial insurance broker ... Someone polished, articulate, commercially sharp and ridiculously driven. Someone who is already outperforming their peers but knows they’re capable of much more.”

Mr Bell says he will fund all capital, technology and marketing, and has the resources to scale aggressively.

Candidates need strong commercial insurance broking experience, the ability to recruit and lead a broking team, presentation and communication skills, the ability to win clients and build relationships, an entrepreneurial mindset, an “obsession with success”, and “relentless drive, energy and ambition”.

Mr Bell told insuranceNEWS.com.au he is aiming for a December launch but declined to comment further at this stage.

One broker said they understand that dozens of industry professionals have already made contact with the entrepreneur.

"There's no doubt it has sparked a lot of interest," the broker told insuranceNEWS.com.au. "A $200 million brokerage in four years is going some, and many will want to know if it's for real and how he plans to achieve it."

See the post here.

Johns Lyng subsidiary Bright & Duggan Group will buy Civium Property Group’s strata and building management business, subject to clearance from the competition watchdog.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is assessing the acquisition after Bright & Duggan notified it.

Bright & Duggan provides strata and building management services to owners’ corporations, bodies corporate and community title schemes in the ACT, NSW, Queensland and Victoria. Civium offers similar services in the same markets.

The commission has issued a questionnaire seeking feedback on how the deal may affect competition in the strata and building management services sector.

It expects to complete the assessment by November 16. Feedback to the questionnaire must be made by tomorrow.

Bruce Cooper has been promoted to COO at loss adjuster Technical Assessing.

Mr Cooper has been ACT state manager and executive loss adjuster for five years. He will now work with Technical Assessing’s functional managers to strengthen accountability, alignment and co-ordination across the national operating model, the company says.

“Bruce’s appointment reflects his significant contribution to our business and the board’s confidence in his proven leadership and ability to help lead TA through our next phase of growth and transformation.

“As a highly respected leader, Bruce has played an important role in TA’s success through his commitment to our people, clients and business.”

IAG has partnered with fintech Brighte to help its employees and NRMA Insurance customers transition their homes to more sustainable energy.

Eligible staff and customers can access discounts on solar systems, battery storage and electric vehicle chargers installed by Brighte-accredited vendors.

The fintech provides payment plans and financing for energy-efficient home upgrades.

IAG says the partnership supports its ambition of “empowering better choices for a safer place”, outlined in its recently refreshed Climate Action Plan: Towards FY30.

EM of group sustainability and climate action Amy Hogan said: “Households want practical ways to improve how their homes use energy, but many don’t know where to start.”

Brighte founder and CEO Katherine McConnell says the partnership shows how organisations can help turn interest in home energy upgrades into action.

“By working with trusted organisations like IAG, we’re helping more households move forward with home energy upgrades, giving employees and customers a direct path to accredited vendors, quotes and finance options,” she said.

IAG staff and NRMA Insurance customers can receive discounts of up to $500 on qualifying home energy upgrades.

From left, Morgan Long, Paul O'Leary and Daniel Tuckwell

This year Epsilon Underwriting will celebrate a quarter of a century of providing specialist risk solutions – and it’s busy laying the groundwork to position itself for more success in years to come.

The company has focused on carefully considered strategic moves to solidify its market presence, with an eye on the future.

In 2024 it combined forces with Wellington Underwriting and Aster to create a business with more than $150 million in gross written premium.

And in July, it strengthened its array of expertise when marine underwriter RedSky Insurance became part of the company under a partnership agreement.

“We have been true to our word and consistent with our capacity and our brokers,” CEO Morgan Long says.

“And we have always done right by our clients. Everyone’s very proud and I’m excited to see where we go in the next 25 years and beyond.

“We hope to offer other product lines in the future and be a safe pair of hands for our clients … That’s what we want the market to know.”

The expansion approach adopted by Epsilon has proved effective as the industry passes through different market phases.

Whether it’s a hard or soft cycle, Epsilon has remained a reliable risk solutions provider for brokers and clients because it has carefully grown its stable of offerings.

“We try to find businesses that are aligned … but also provide us with expertise in a different sector that we don’t always play in,” Mr Long says.

Epsilon started as a casualty underwriting agency when Peter and Lynn O’Shea founded the business in a garage in Paddington, Sydney.

“We then bolted on property and contract works and now we have marine,” Mr Long says.

“So we’re bringing in people with the right skill set and the same service mentality that Epsilon has to complement our business, add more offerings to our clients and provide a higher level of technical capability so that our broking partners are getting an expert in each of those fields.”

Chief underwriting officer Paul O’Leary says feedback from brokers and clients to the agency’s expanding suite of offerings has been positive.

“Epsilon is a well-known brand within the Australian market. It’s known for its service. It’s known for its product. It’s known for its technical ability. And when you add these other businesses in, everyone knows they’re going to get that same expertise that we are known for.”

That pool of risk expertise that Epsilon has built up is especially evident in situations where brokers have found it difficult to secure cover for clients.

“We look for ways to write business, not take the easy way to say ‘Oh, that’s too hard for us. Let’s push it away’. When others are saying no to a certain class of business, that’s music to our ears,” Mr O’Leary says.

“That’s where we like to step in and say ‘Let’s see if there’s a way that we can do this’.”

Epsilon aims to mark its 25-year milestone by continuing its legacy, expertise and service.
Looking ahead, it believes machines won’t ever replace people in the underwriting decision-making phase, but they do have a role to play.

“AI is really important to us … but you can’t negotiate with a computer or AI to get a result,” Mr Long says.

“The ability to continue to pick up the phone and talk to an underwriter … that has been our success over the years. AI will help, no doubt, but it won’t replace the human interaction.”

Mr O’Leary adds: “We want underwriters to be making the decisions because that’s the experience that we have employed. Their technical ability is what differentiates us from others.”

The company strongly believes in taking a hands-on approach to nurturing its next generation of leaders. The training includes pairing them with experienced team members who can share knowledge accumulated from years of assessing business risks.

Mr Long, who joined in 2005 and became CEO in 2015, says “the knowledge base is something that we really value. A number of the team who have come through the business and developed their careers here still continue to work here. Our retention of good people is fantastic.”

It’s an approach that should stand Epsilon in good stead for decades to come.

Turning insurance from a reactive sector that pays out after disaster strikes, to a proactive one that anticipates and cuts the risk of a claim is the lodestar. Insurers increasingly talk of becoming a resilience partner for clients.

But one firm has prevention in its DNA – and a unique proposition. 

Mitti Insurance has come a long way in just six years. As it expands globally with a bolstered leadership team in place, Mitti is now firmly looking at its next phase of growth.

The firm’s founding principle was to offer a new approach to insurance by using technology to better monitor and assess risks on a real-time basis and reward better operational behaviour, rather than relying on backward-looking statistics.

Mitti Insurance ties coverage to operational data from the Mitti operations system, formerly known as SafetyCulture, to help businesses manage risk before it turns into a claim. Insights captured directly from the frontline underpin the platform's intelligence, letting Mitti Insurance price risk more accurately and prevent losses more effectively than insurers still working off historical averages.

Policyholders get the tools and insight to spot risks early and guard against preventable claims. Time-stamped, geolocated operational data leads to better documentation, more defensible claims and faster settlements.

Running safer businesses

Mitti Insurance CEO John Blake says the original idea was to prove the hypothesis that customers using the platform would be “running safer businesses and that should translate to fewer claims and a better loss ratio, and the last six years have proven that to be true”.

The results are impressive – policyholders on the platform run 19% lower claims costs and a 9% lower loss ratio than those who are not. One client, Trippas White Group has enjoyed a 35% cost reduction in some areas.     

Mr Blake says the platform “captures incidents, issues, near misses. It gives us unique insights into what businesses are doing, the daily behaviour of those teams. Most of the world’s insurance looks backwards and prices your risk based on what’s happened. We see the day-to-day activity of those teams and should be able to price their risk based on what they are actually doing. Risk prevention is the game.” 

Newly introduced Risk Action Plans give policyholders a structured, quarterly process for identifying and managing their top risks, designed by risk engineers and built directly into the Mitti platform.

Co-founder and MD Australia Dan Cummins says these are based on “where we think 65% of claims will happen – attritional claims.

“As a minimum for our policyholders, a 15-minute check on a quarterly basis will go a long way to reducing a potential claim on their business. They’re not just getting coverage, they’re getting a tool to help their business. We’ve had some really good collaboration with brokers around how we help them and their clients.” 

Growth focus

From its original commercial package, Mitti Insurance has diversified and is now offering commercial general liability and property industrial special risk protection, and the Mitti platform is now used by 2 million frontline workers in 190 countries.

“We have 80,000 organisations using Mitti globally, and we’ve only just scratched the surface of what is possible,” Mr Blake says.

“So the focus for us is, how do we expand our insurance product to meet the needs of those customers?” 

The two leaders bring complementary skills and experience. Mr Blake, who spent seven years with Goldman Sachs in New York advising growth-stage technology companies, has deep technology and platform-scaling experience from leading Mitti’s own transformation as COO and CFO.

Mr Cummins has 25 years in insurance, including 14 at QBE, before setting up Mitti Insurance.  

After recently rebranding as Mitti Insurance, after three years as SafetyCulture Care, the pair believe that with their model now proven – and unique because of the proprietary nature of the data set – the time is ripe for expansion, and its recent foray into the huge and complex US market is one proof point. 

Mr Blake, who was recently appointed global CEO, says: “My role is to scale this offering globally. We want to expand our insurance offering and the link between the core platform and the insurance outcome.

“We’re excited about what we’re doing and have just launched our P&C offering in the US this year.”

He says the US expansion could come from additional products, acquisitions, capital-raising or existing capacity partners. 

Empowering brokers by adding value

While Mitti Insurance’s leaders acknowledge that price will always be important in insurance, they firmly believe the added value they offer in terms of data-driven risk mitigation will continue to be attractive to businesses. 

“If you’re running a business, insurance is one of your key tools,” Mr Blake says.

“The value we’re giving to customers through the platform is risk prevention. Every time we prevent a piece of equipment breaking down, or stop a business interruption, or stop a loss, that’s worth far more to our customer than a slight reduction in their premium.” 

With close to 90% of the Australian commercial insurance market still flowing through brokers, Mitti Insurance wants to better empower them, rather than route around them.

Mr Cummins says: “Brokers are our long-term partners. We're currently building a portal that uses AI to give them the same insights the platform gives us, so they can see what their clients are actually doing day to day, and be a far more differentiated ‘trusted advisor’ because of it.”

The evolution of the authorised representative sector in Australia was the focus for a free Insurance News webinar.

Based on our recently published Top 20 Authorised Rep Networks report, which was sponsored by Arch Insurance, the webinar tackled topics including the rapid rise of the AR model, the range of approaches deployed by different companies, consolidation and technology.

Moderated by Insurance News editor-in-chief John Deex, expert speakers included Arch head of distribution and engagement Michael Faulkner, Insurance Advisernet MD Shaun Standfield, Community Broker Network EGM of distribution Leigh Frost and repX chief commercial officer Angela O’Neil.

“The AR model has evolved significantly over the last decade and is now a core distribution channel in the Australian market,” Mr Faulkner said.

“From an insurer perspective, one of the great strengths of the AR model is its entrepreneurial nature.

“ARs are often deeply connected with their clients, highly responsive and focused on specific industries, regions or customer segments.

“That creates real value for insurers because it helps us access markets and opportunities that might be otherwise difficult to reach.”

More than six in 10 insurance customers are likely to abandon an interaction if submitting information becomes too difficult, according to new research from Smart Communications, highlighting the commercial cost of poor digital customer experiences. 

The 2026 Customer Experience in Insurance Benchmark Report, based on responses from thousands of consumers across global markets, suggests insurers are still falling short of customer expectations despite ongoing investment in digital transformation. The research identifies four areas where insurers have the greatest opportunity to improve customer experience: using artificial intelligence responsibly, modernising digital data collection, improving customer communications and reducing friction across customer interactions. 

AI needs to build trust

Artificial intelligence remains a key focus for insurers, but customers are signalling they want greater transparency around how it is being used.

The report found 85% of consumers consider it important that insurers disclose when AI is involved in customer interactions. While many see value in AI delivering faster service, greater accuracy and more personalised experiences, confidence in the technology handling personal information securely has softened, with many respondents still expecting human oversight for important decisions. 

“Customers value transparency above all when communicating with their insurer. As businesses are adopting AI into their processes, it is easy for consumers to lose trust if they feel like they are communicating with a robot rather than a human. The number of customers who will leave a business due to bad communications has increased to over 70% in the past year, solidifying the need for businesses to prioritise clear, transparent communications or risk losing out to their competitors,” says Aaron Everingham, director of insurance at Smart Communications, Australia. 

Simpler processes drive better outcomes

The report found customers increasingly expect digital interactions to be straightforward, whether they’re lodging a claim, updating policy information or submitting supporting documentation.

Long forms, repeated requests for the same information and manual processes continue to frustrate customers, while secure, intuitive digital experiences are now seen as an expectation rather than a point of difference. The research also found customers who experience simple digital interactions are more likely to remain loyal, recommend their insurer and purchase additional products. 

Communications remain under pressure

Customer communications also emerged as an area requiring attention.

Satisfaction with insurer communications declined compared with the previous year, despite respondents placing increasing importance on receiving timely, relevant and personalised information. The findings suggest communication continues to play a central role in shaping trust, particularly during claims and policy servicing. 

Connected experiences still missing

The report’s final theme centres on reducing friction across customer interactions.

Consumers increasingly expect information to move seamlessly between websites, mobile apps, email and contact centres without having to repeat information or restart processes. However, many respondents said disconnected systems continue to make interactions more difficult than they should be, highlighting the need for insurers to better connect digital channels and back-end systems. 

“The customer experience can make or break consumer confidence. Investing in technology that allows customer information to carry seamlessly across every interaction, from the first quote to policy updates and renewal notices, will transform the way consumers view insurers. Insurers should also ensure their systems make it easier for customers to access information and manage their policies through the channel of their choice. Getting these foundations right will not only create a more seamless customer experience but could also become a key competitive differentiator for insurers,” Mr Everingham says.

While the report identifies several areas for improvement, it concludes insurers have an opportunity to strengthen customer loyalty by making digital interactions easier, improving communications and using technology in ways that build customer confidence rather than adding complexity. 

The 2026 Customer Experience in Insurance Benchmark Report, published by Smart Communications, includes detailed benchmarking across regions and generations, together with practical recommendations for insurers looking to improve customer engagement and digital service delivery.

The full report can be accessed here.

Ralfi is an Outlook assistant that helps insurance brokers manage the renewal and claims process.
It reduces the relentless follow-ups and chasing required during renewals and claims; formats information without brokers manually editing PDFs or spreadsheets; and allows clients to provide information without uploading or downloading files. Ralfi also helps brokers stay on top of important compliance milestones and maintain a clear record for audits.
Ralfi is not a CRM and does not replace a broker’s existing systems. It works alongside them to automate repetitive renewal work.

Founders Faria Anzum and Jack Hazlehurst experienced the importance of insurance first-hand after Faria had a bike accident in San Francisco in 2024. Pictured below is the couple after the accident – and at the start of almost a year of insurance paperwork.

Travel insurance protected them from medical expenses that could have exceeded $US100,000 ($139,333). However, receiving that support was far more difficult than it should have been.

For almost a year, they went back and forth between hospitals, insurers and their insurance broker, managing paperwork, follow-ups and administrative delays while trying to recover.

Without insurance and the support of insurance brokers, the financial consequences could have been devastating. However, the experience revealed how much unnecessary administrative work still exists across the industry.

It inspired Jack and Faria to build technology that removes some of this burden from brokers and their clients.

Built with brokers

Jack and Faria spent several months speaking with insurance brokers and understanding the challenges they face throughout the renewal process across the US and Australia.

Many brokers told them up to 40% of their time is spent on administration rather than advising and supporting clients. Ralfi aims to change that.

The insurance broking industry is also attracting fewer young professionals. As experienced brokers retire over the next decade, the industry may struggle to replace their knowledge and capacity.

Without better technology, insurance risks becoming slower, more expensive and harder to access. Ralfi imagines a different future for the next generation of brokers, where technology manages repetitive administrative work and brokers can focus on advice, relationships and protecting their clients.

Launching at Beyond the Buzzwords

It was a privilege to officially launch Ralfi at the Beyond the Buzzwords conference.

There were so many brilliant speakers sharing practical insights into how AI can create real value in insurance, not just as a buzzword, but as a tool for solving complex problems in highly regulated environments.

It has been great meeting so many curious minds who are asking thoughtful questions, challenging old processes and paving the future for the next generation of brokers.

We hope to be back again next year!

Book a demo at https://ralfi.io/

The Federal Court has fined Hollard $2 million over failures handling a home and contents claim made by a couple after a storm damaged their roof.

The insurer breached of its duty of utmost good faith with significant delays rectifying mistakes, arranging emergency work and providing emergency accommodation, and it also failed in its communications, the court says.

“The saga experienced by the insureds was extended and must have been stressful and traumatic,” Justice Catherine Button said in a decision delivered today. “They were given the runaround in more ways than one, and lived in their ever-deteriorating home, as the saga wore on.”

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission says that despite initially accepting the roof claim after the October 2021 storm, Hollard delayed for 15 months and then rejected it.

The couple’s home in regional Victoria became riddled with moisture, mould and decay.

ASIC chair Sarah Court says the court has ordered the first civil penalty against an insurer for breaching its duty of utmost good faith, and it sends a warning to others about the devastating impact poor claim handling and prolonged delays can have on consumers.

“Hollard’s serious claim handling failures left a family in limbo for years and living in a home that was uninhabitable,” she said.

“When Australians make an insurance claim, they are often facing some of the most difficult times in their lives.

“This decision confirms that insurers must act fairly, communicate clearly and make decisions without unnecessary delay, and must put their customers first.”

Hollard says it acknowledges the Federal Court’s findings in relation to a single claim under section 13 of the Insurance Contracts Act.

“We extend our deepest apologies and sincerely regret the impact of this experience on the customer,” a spokesperson said. “We recognise that, at the time, we fell materially short of our obligations in the handling of this claim.

“Hollard has made significant improvements to claims handling, and we remain committed to investing in ongoing improvements.”

The insurer says it supports ASIC’s work driving positive outcomes for consumers and has co-operated with the regulator throughout the matter.

ASIC had sought a penalty of $30 million. Hollard, which admitted it failed to comply with its duty, had argued the penalty should be between $100,000 and $300,000.

See the judgment here. 

The federal government has scrapped proposed changes to the Disaster Recovery Funding Framework after a campaign by Queensland councils and politicians.

The planned overhaul would have reduced Canberra’s contribution to the funding from 64%-75% to a 50-50 split with states.

This week, an open letter from Queensland Disaster Recovery Minister Ann Leahy to the Prime Minister – signed by 130 mayors and businesses including RACQ – said: “Your proposed funding cuts will mean Queensland communities are forced to choose which assets not to rebuild, while facing higher insurance premiums, reduced community safety and bankrupt councils.

“Queensland already pays its fair share. Per capita, Queensland residents pay over 50% more for disaster response and recovery than NSW residents, and three to five times as much as residents of other states and territories.

“Your proposed cuts reduce the Commonwealth’s contribution to disaster recovery by billions of dollars over the forward estimates, diminish a successful program with a proven record of improving resilience, and leave states, councils and local communities to fund the difference.”

In July, the Local Government Association of Queensland said the state would have missed out on $2.8 billion of federal funding if the proposed changes had been in place since 2018.

Today, the federal government announced the planned changes will be withdrawn.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said: “The Commonwealth will retain the current cost‑sharing arrangements, providing up to 75% of disaster recovery funding when certain criteria are met, because we know communities need certainty when disasters hit.

“Further changes include retaining the ability for councils to claim costs under counter-disaster operations and revising funding activation thresholds to ensure all communities get the support they need when they need it.

“The changes we’ve announced today, following extensive consultation with locals in disaster‑affected communities, will mean that our policy works even more effectively, with more funding [and] easier access to funding in a more timely fashion.”

Mr Chalmers says today’s announcement “is the direct result of strong advocacy from councils and Queensland federal Labor colleagues”.

Insurers have pressed for a rethink on their share of the $170.3 million special levy to cover a cost blowout in the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort, questioning the metrics used to decide contributions.

Insurance product providers are in line to contribute $12.97 million and insurance product distributors another $1.44 million under the proposed three-tier “waterfall” funding model, according to a Treasury consultation paper.

They are grouped in tier 3, comprising retail-facing subsectors – including claims handling services providers – that insurers say are “unrelated” to the scheme’s FY27 funding gap.

Tier 1 contributors are associated with the scheme’s losses and tier 2 is for those deemed “sufficiently connected” to the cost blowout.

The Insurance Council of Australia says it is concerned about the use of Australian Securities and Investments Commission industry funding model metrics to allocate a tier 3 levy to insurance subsectors.

“As outlined [previously], using total premium income as a levy metric for insurance product providers can capture commercial as well as retail insurance activity,” the council says in a submission to Treasury.

“This raises questions about the consistency of the allocation with the policy rationale for tier 3, which is described as applying to retail-facing financial services subsectors.

“Similarly, the claims handling metric can produce highly concentrated outcomes because claims volumes can vary significantly between insurance products and business models.”

ICA urges Treasury to reconsider its approach, noting it has made a change to address a similar issue with tier 3 large securities and futures exchange levy contributors, where the metric can inadvertently capture wholesale and institutional activity.

“The Insurance Council considers that the same principle should apply where insurance metrics capture activity outside the intended retail focus of tier 3,” the submission says.

Insurers have also repeated a call for “lasting reform” of the scheme, which is a last resort for consumers with unpaid Australian Financial Complaints Authority compensation awards, excluding general and life insurance.

“Our position is that funding arrangements should reinforce accountability by aligning costs as closely as practicable with the sectors and activities responsible for, connected to or benefiting from the conduct that caused consumer losses,” the ICA submission says.

“The scale of the current special levy reinforces this.”

More than one in five Australians bend the truth on their home insurance applications to save money, according to research by comparison site Finder.

The 2026 Household Report reveals 22% of people with home cover have left out or exaggerated information when taking out or renewing policies.

About 10% admit they have fudged details about alarms, locks or security cameras and 9% have misrepresented the value of their home or contents; the same proportion have claimed DIY repairs or renovations were completed by licensed tradies.

Ceyda Erem, insurance expert at Finder, says trying to reduce premiums by bending the truth could leave homeowners far worse off.

“Many Australians are understandably looking for ways to bring down their household expenses, but insurance is one area where cutting corners can really backfire.

“A small saving on your premium isn’t worth it if inaccurate details give your insurer grounds to reduce or deny a claim just when you need their help most.”

About 7% of survey respondents have been untruthful about whether their property is in a bushfire, flood or cyclone zone, and 6% have lied about the age or construction of their home.

A further 4% have left out previous insurance claims or rejections, and 4% have misrepresented whether their home is owner-occupied, rented out or vacant.

Ms Erem says consumers should review their cover rather than risk a rejected claim.

“If your premium has crept up, resist the urge to tweak the details to bring it down. Look for a more competitive policy with the right level of cover instead, because saving money should never mean gambling with your home.”

Finder notes most respondents (74%) say they have always given accurate information when taking out or renewing home insurance.

The industry ombudsman has backed an insurer after policyholders complained they were misled into believing their car’s agreed value reflected its market worth.

The complainants sought $28,000 after their car was written off in January, arguing insurer Hollard’s settlement offer of $20,022 was insufficient to buy a replacement.

Hollard had assessed repair costs at $21,301, with a salvage value of $3000 – above the $20,022 sum insured.

The dispute centred on a policy renewal certificate stating: “Your sum insured may have changed to reflect the value of your car in the market. If you wish to adjust the sum insured, please contact us.” 

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority says policy documents made clear the agreed value was the maximum payable for a total loss, and the insureds were responsible for checking whether the amount met their needs. 

The complainants argued the wording was unclear and they understood the amount nominated by Hollard to represent the vehicle’s market value.  

But AFCA finds the documents did not say the agreed value was equivalent to market worth, and Hollard’s offer was consistent with its policy.  

The certificate highlighted the agreed value and instructed policyholders to check the cover was suitable for their needs.  

AFCA has rejected the policyholders’ argument that ambiguous wording should be interpreted in their favour, finding the certificate and product disclosure statement were clear when read together. 

See the ruling here.

Hurricane Isaias has crossed the US coastline in Florida after an unusually quiet Atlantic season so far this year. 

Isaias is the latest-forming first hurricane since at least 1905 and the first in the Atlantic basin since Melissa last October, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says. 

The Atlantic hurricane season has been quiet in part due to a strong El Nino, which can suppress tropical cyclone formation in the Atlantic and increase activity in the Pacific. 

Isaias peaked at category three intensity before reaching the coast near Destin in the Florida panhandle at about 9:30pm Friday local time. It crossed at category two strength with maximum sustained winds of about 168 km/h, before being downgraded. 

The Insurance Information Institute says Isaias is the first hurricane to make US landfall since Milton struck Siesta Key in Florida on October 9 2024, while it’s the ninth named storm this season, which runs until November 30. Tropical storms Bertha and Edouard previously crossed the Louisiana coast. 

Insurer State Farm said yesterday it had received more than 3000 total claims across states impacted by Isaias and anticipated many more as people return to their homes and survey damage. The states with the highest claim counts are Florida, Alabama, and Georgia. 

In the Pacific, NOAA is monitoring Hurricane Simon, which is expected to slowly weaken before moving inland across west-central Mexico around midweek. 

The most recent advisory says the category 3 hurricane is generating sustained winds near 195 km/h.

The tech boom is creating opportunities for property and casualty insurers as global uncertainties make it harder to balance growth and resilience, an S&P Global Ratings Asia-Pacific event heard.

Insurers see emerging potential driven by renewal transition trends and technology advances, with S&P forecasting new demand for coverage of data centres could generate $US10 billion ($14 billion) in global premium this year.

“There is no shortage of growth opportunities for insurers, whether from cyber, data centre or the long-standing natural catastrophe protection gap,” S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Wenwen Chen said.

An S&P report following the event says some industry leaders expect technology to be a differentiator, and those that cannot afford to invest in AI may lose market share and relevancy.

The event also heard that chasing growth requires capital resilience, which is complicated by volatile markets and macroeconomic adversity. Markets want “underwriting at white-knuckle speed” and challenges exist where there is limited history and complex interdependencies.

Liberty International Insurance Asia-Pacific president Matthew Jackson said data centres may look like property risks, but many are becoming power and infrastructure risks.

“Exposure is no longer limited to one building, but across multiple facilities and contractors,” he said. “Portfolios may be accumulating more correlated risk than current modelling reflects.”

Peak Re chief underwriting officer Philip Hough noted impacts from climate change, cyber, geopolitical uncertainties, supply chain disruptions and the rapid emergence of AI.

“The industry may still be underestimating how these individual emerging risks are slowly interacting and actually amplifying one another,” he said.

S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Carmi Margalit said new types of private credit assets have expanded on insurer balance sheets.

For analysts that requires “deeper dives” into asset structures that are becoming more complex and less transparent, while an expansion of private credit brings considerations around a potential lack of liquidity, she said.

The average value of business interruption claims has risen more than 30% annually over the past two years, and impacts from company closures often dwarf physical damage costs, an Allianz Commercial analysis shows.

The insurer’s business interruption global practice group leader Sarah Versavaud says while the frequency of claims has remained relatively stable, loss severity is a concern.

“Recovery is often taking longer and becoming more expensive, with supply chain constraints, inflation, geopolitical developments and rising mitigation costs all contributing to higher claim values than we saw just a few years ago,” she said.

The average value of a BI claim has risen to more than €850,000 ($1.4 billion) – about 70% higher than the corresponding average property damage amount of nearly €500,000 ($805,070).

The global report examines 7888 business interruption claims valued at about €6.74 billion ($10.9 billion) in the five years to last December.

Fire and explosion was the costliest cause of claims, accounting for more than 40% of the total, followed by natural catastrophes at 34%.

By claim number, natural catastrophes were the leading cause at 26%, followed by water damage, fire and explosion, machinery breakdown, wilful acts such as theft or vandalism, and collisions and crashes. “Other” losses accounted for 16%.

Some natural catastrophe claims are developing over increasingly long periods, with many from Hurricane Helene still unresolved after it struck the US in September 2024.

“Supply chain delays, labour shortages and volatile material costs can extend both recovery and settlement,” the report says.

Ransomware remains the leading cyber disruption cause, but a growing share of loss activity is driven by cloud outages, software failures and incidents at third-party tech providers.

Ms Versavaud says in some cases relatively minor property damage has led to long shutdowns and large BI losses.

“In one recent case, a fire in a small-scale manufacturing unit resulted in relatively limited physical damage yet ultimately disrupted downstream operations and led to a nine-figure group-wide business interruption loss,” she said.

“It is a reminder that, in today’s interconnected manufacturing environment, the severity of a business interruption loss is not always determined by the extent of physical damage.”

The report is available here.

Insurers detected fraudulent claims worth £1.34 billion ($2.55 billion) in the UK last year, up 14% on the previous year, an industry peak body says.

By number, detected fraudulent claims fell 3% to 93,900 cases, according to the Association of British Insurers.

The figures point to fewer but more costly cases, and a shift towards higher-severity, more sophisticated fraud, ABI says.

Each claim was worth on average £14,300 ($27,200).

“On average, more than 250 fraudulent insurance claims are detected each day, and this is unfortunately likely to be just the tip of the iceberg,” detective chief inspector and head of City of London Police’s insurance fraud enforcement department Simon Klust said.

“It is therefore important for collaboration across law enforcement and industry to further deepen, to help ... bring offenders to justice.”

In one case, a fraudster who submitted false home insurance claims for stolen Lego sets was sentenced to 28 months in jail. Another was caught running a “crash for cash” motor claim con.

Investigators also uncovered a £300,000 ($570,000) travel insurance scam involving multiple fake identities and fabricated documents to support bogus medical emergency claims.

Exaggerated loss remains the most common type of fraud, with 26,900 cases identified.

Scams involving fraudsters deliberately creating or staging loss incidents rose 30% to about 5600 cases.

Insurers also prevented fraudulent insurance applications – when information is deliberately misrepresented or withheld to obtain cover or reduce premiums – worth £1.8 billion ($3.42 billion) last year, up 24%.

“Fraudsters are targeting much bigger payouts,” ABI said. “As emerging technologies such as AI become more widely available, fraudsters will continue to look for new ways to exploit them ... making it more important than ever that, as an industry, we continue to work together to detect, prevent and deter fraud across all lines.”

Motor insurance accounted for 55% of all detected cases; 51,900 fraudulent motor claims were worth £625 million ($1.19 billion).

There were 17,700 detected fraudulent property claims, with an average value of £11,400 ($21,700), a record high.

Detected travel claim numbers grew 85% to 4500, while the value increased 16% to £8.6 million ($16.3 million).

Seven people have been charged with running a major arson-related insurance fraud and money laundering scheme in the US.

It is alleged that between 2019 and this year, the group rented homes, obtained insurance and then set 13 fires at the properties in the Monroe and West Monroe areas of Louisiana.

They allegedly submitted fake insurance claims for contents and extended stays at hotels, plus fraudulent relief claims with a national humanitarian organisation.

“The audacity, the recklessness and the greed of these defendants to allegedly turn fire-setting into a for-profit operation is staggering,” said Zachary Keller, attorney for the Western District of Louisiana.

“The conspirators charged here fed their greed by putting innocent lives at risk, including those of first responders, and destroyed the hard-earned property of others while contributing to higher insurance costs for us all.”

The seven are charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, and use of fire to commit federal felony.

Three were also charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering, concealment money laundering and structuring. All face decades in federal prison if convicted.

Advisers have urged the federal government to reconsider a planned $10 million special charge on the profession to pay for the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort’s FY27 funding gap.

Financial Advice Association Australia suggests the sum be reapportioned to retail-facing subsectors – a group that includes general insurance product providers and distributors.

“Set the ... allocation to financial advice for 2026-27 at zero ... in recognition of the unsustainable impact on small businesses,” the association says in a submission to Treasury.

The federal government has imposed a special levy on the financial services sector to raise $170.62 million to cover the CSLR funding gap this financial year.

It has chosen a “waterfall” model to spread the levy across three tiers, according to a Treasury consultation paper.

Tier 1 is for the subsector primarily associated with the CSLR’s losses; tier 2 is any subsectors assessed as sufficiently connected to the losses; and tier 3 is retail-facing financial services sectors.

The association says it recognises that “difficult trade-offs have been made, anchored by the imperative to compensate victims without further delay. However, the proposed allocation still places a material cost on a small business sector that has already paid its $20 million cap.”

Other suggestions in the FAAA submission include ways to strengthen the compensation scheme.

“We recommend temporary levy relief for small financial advice businesses, broader reforms to address the drivers of CSLR costs, and that victims be compensated as soon as possible, noting there are no legislative barriers to payments being made by the government before the determination is tabled in parliament.”

“Recurring problems” in claims handling remain a priority for the Life Code Compliance Committee, according to the independent watchdog’s 2025-26 annual report.

The committee has already launched a review of claims practices and expects to release the findings this financial year.

“There is still important work ahead,” chair Jan McClelland said of the committee’s focus areas.

“Claims remain a clear priority, with our data continuing to show problems with timely benefit payments, communication and complaints handling.

“We will publish further work from the inquiry into claims handling already under way, while the continuing development of the new code will provide another important opportunity to strengthen protections for customers.”

The report says the committee acted in FY26 on serious non-compliance, and two unnamed insurers were sanctioned for major breaches of the code.

“We considered not only individual matters but also the broader systemic issues that carry wider consequences for consumers and industry practice,” Ms McClelland said.

“During the year, we reviewed 14 significant breaches reported by insurers and finalised eight of those reviews.

“The matters highlighted recurring weaknesses across claims handling, annual renewal notices, legacy system migrations and customer communications, including problems that pointed to broader issues in insurer systems, controls and governance.”

The report says the committee received code breach allegations from customers, their representatives and other members of the public.

“In 2025-26, we reviewed 120 allegations and finalised 111. Claims accounted for 69% of the allegations we finalised, while vulnerability and hardship accounted for a further 19%. The allegations led to nine individual investigations and three targeted reviews, with two significant breaches reported by insurers,” the report says.

Acenda Life says Ross Miller will become chief commercial officer, taking over from Sean McCormack, who is stepping down.

Mr Miller was previously group chief people and culture officer. Lisa Green, who joins from oOh!Media, will now take that role.

Acenda Life says Mr Miller will lead Australian commercial teams across insurance, wealth and retirement solutions.

“Ross has made an exceptional impact since joining Acenda Life earlier this year,” Acenda Group CEO Chris de Bruin said. “His enterprise perspective, deep understanding of customer and distribution operations, and proven ability to lead through transformation will be important as we sharpen our commercial strategy and build a sustainable platform for growth.”

The Acenda Group was formed in October last year following Nippon Life’s acquisition of Resolution Life Group, including its operations in Australia and New Zealand.

Swiss Re says the life market is changing as millions of consumers approach retirement with the option to self-manage their pension funds.

“The shift is creating opportunities for insurers, banks and advisers – and a race to reach people before retirement, when they are making critical decisions about how to manage their savings, generate income and protect their wealth,” the reinsurer notes in a global report.

According to Swiss Re, the change is already visible in some markets, including the US, where more than half of retirees chose to withdraw and self-manage their funds in 2018, up from 10% in 2000.

“This means that individuals are becoming responsible for more complex choices about how much income to take as cash, how much to keep invested, what to leave to their family and how to pay for care later in life,” the reinsurer said.

“To make the right decisions, the need for advice is growing – not only on retirement income, but also on wealth transfer and later-life care.”

Swiss Re highlights the importance of distribution as life insurers respond to the market shift.

“Distribution is at the heart of life insurance. It shapes who insurers reach, what they sell and how effectively they build and retain customer relationships.”

The reinsurer says the growing role of independent advisers, brokers and other multi-provider intermediaries is a structural trend in many markets, particularly where customers require complex advice and value access to products from a host of insurers.

“Several external and structural drivers are increasing the importance of life insurance distribution.

“Advice becomes critical as ageing populations take on greater individual responsibility for their retirement and navigate more complex pension and later-life financial decisions. For insurers and distributors, this brings forward the opportunity for engaging customers.”

WIP Group head of growth Damien Davie has been promoted to chief partnerships officer.

The newly created position involves leading the group income protection specialist’s relationships with employers, industry bodies and superannuation funds.

WIP says the role “builds on a strategy [group CEO] Jason Potter-Rose began in April 2024, when he established a dedicated partnerships team to deepen the group’s work with those organisations”.

Mr Potter-Rose says Mr Davie’s appointment “strengthens the partnerships that have driven our growth. In a competitive market for skilled people, cover designed around each workforce helps our partners build their employer brand and keep their best people.”

WIP says it designs group income protection and accident and health cover with organisations that arrange it, and manages claims through its n2n Claims Solutions arm.

It says it has delivered more than $250 million in claims payments.

WIP also offers online income and lifestyle protection insurance for individuals through its Canopy Insurance business.

A $2 million fine imposed on Hollard for claim handling failures is the first civil penalty for an insurer breaching its duty of utmost good faith, the corporate regulator says.

Australian Securities and Investments Commission chair Sarah Court says the outcome sends a warning to insurers about the devastating impact poor claim handling can have on consumers during some of the most difficult times in their lives.

Hollard admitted it breached the duty of utmost good faith in handling a home claim lodged by a couple in regional Victoria after October 2021 storms – an industry-declared catastrophe.

The policy was issued by CommInsure, which Hollard acquired in September 2022, and the contraventions extended from November 2021 to April 2023.

The Federal Court’s Justice Catherine Button said Hollard’s claim handling fell well short of the basic levels of fairness and reasonableness that community standards of decency and fair dealing require, and aspects were “hard to fathom”.

“In particular, the failure to appoint an engineer for about eight months after the need for one was identified on the first inspection, the glacial progress of the claim handling while the insureds’ house decayed around them, and the progress of mould growth cannot be explained simply as the product of staff busyness or poor communication with suppliers,” she said.

Barrister Joel Harris says on LinkedIn that the case shows regulatory risk comes not just from ensuring the right decision is made on cover, but also that day-to-day handling of a claim meets the good faith obligation. “None of the insurer’s conduct was deliberate or dishonest, but the compounding effect of the delays still breached its duty,” he said.

Financial Rights Legal Centre policy development principal Drew MacRae says the fine sets a precedent and has implications for improving the insurance code of practice.

“I honestly hope all Insurance Council of Australia board members keep this case in mind when signing off on a redrafted code to send to ASIC for approval,” he said.

Consumer Action Law Centre assistant director, policy and campaigns Meg Dalling says it's an important case, with ASIC moving to enforcement after completing a number of reviews, and the regulator had sought a $30 million penalty.

"It just shows you how very very serious ASIC considered this case," she said. "But we regard this as just one of many, so there is a lot that the insurance industry needs to do to improve its practices."

Hollard acknowledged the court’s decision and says it has significantly improved its claims handling and is committed to ongoing investment.

“We extend our deepest apologies and sincerely regret the impact of this experience on the customer,” a spokesperson said. “We recognise that, at the time, we fell materially short of our obligations in the handling of this claim.”

Find the court decision here.

A leading industry compliance expert has backed the service offered by professional and licensed paid claim intermediaries, as the corporate regulator prepares to examine the sector.

As previously reported, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission will carry out a review of claims management groups after concerns were raised over some business practices. 

Compliance Advocacy Solutions MD Paul Muir, in an article written for insuranceNEWS.com.au, says it is important to distinguish between “professional claimant intermediaries” operating under an appropriate licence and “predatory conduct commonly described as storm or disaster chasing”. 

“I support the role of professional claimant intermediaries in helping customers secure fair outcomes, particularly when claims become complex, disputed or overwhelming,” he writes. 

He says licence obligations provide important guardrails, but a “claimant intermediaries representative industry body and a dedicated code” could build on them. 

See ANALYSIS. 

The Insurance Council of Australia has launched a disaster resilience drive in Canberra as federal parliament sittings resume.

It will host Community Resilience Week at Parliament House, allowing MPs to meet representatives from the industry and organisations including emergency services groups.

“Australia is 50 days out from a summer that could bring the strongest El Nino on record, and insurers and support organisations are in Canberra this week with a clear message: the time to reduce disaster risk is now,” ICA said.

“The week will also focus on the decisions that influence communities’ exposure to those risks, including investment in extreme weather mitigation, land use planning arrangements, the resilience of homes, and recovery arrangements.”

ICA says Community Resilience Week coincides with International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction tomorrow, underscoring the focus on reducing risk before disasters strike, rather than relying on recovery after the damage is done.

“Better forecasting and faster disaster response are important, but they cannot address the underlying risk on their own,” ICA CEO Andrew Hall said. “Greater investment in projects that improve community resilience, better land use planning and stronger homes can reduce the damage disasters cause and help ease pressure on insurance costs over time.

“Insurers are looking forward to having these discussions with policymakers.”

IAG has again called for action on housing resilience, producing a report that lists 20 ways to protect homes from severe weather.

It says the paper – drawing on insights from the industry, government, finance and construction – highlights a critical implementation gap between what is known about housing resilience and what is being delivered.

“IAG has long advocated for stronger climate resilience and greater investment in disaster mitigation initiatives to help protect people, communities and the broader economy from the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather,” MD and CEO Nick Hawkins said.

“This report brings together expertise and insights from the multiple sectors that can help design and deliver resilience construction measures to make properties safer, stronger and better able to withstand the impacts of extreme weather now and into the future.”

The report, prepared by the McKell Institute, groups the 20 recommendations across three stages: act now; co-ordinate and scale; and formalise the architecture.

Developing resilience-linked lending products is one recommendation, and another calls for the creation of a national housing resilience partnership led by Commonwealth, state and territory governments and the peak body representing local councils.

McKell Institute CEO Veronica Newman says the central finding is that Australia’s resilience challenge is increasingly one of implementation, co-ordination, and delivery.

“Improving resilience will require more than stronger standards or better information,” she says in the report. “It will require the construction workforce, supply chains, resilient products, financing arrangements, and institutional capability needed to put established knowledge into practice.”

Australia’s so-far unusually wet El Nino year may still give way to more typical hot, dry conditions, with a potential 50% increase in bushfire risk as the climate pattern strengthens, Moody’s warns.

The ratings agency says it is the wettest El Nino year on record, and the usual shift in Australian weather patterns has not occurred.

But a rapid swing from wet to dry conditions could increase the potential for major bushfires, producing abundant vegetation growth and increasing fuel loads.

Australia’s National Emergency Management Agency is warning people to prepare for a drier, hotter summer.

Moody’s modelling shows El Nino can increase Australian bushfire risk by more than 50% compared with non-El Nino years. However, it reduces tropical cyclone risk, as the storm systems are steered away from the country.

The agency says catastrophe models need to account for interactions between bushfire, cyclone, flood and wind risk, rather than assessing each peril in isolation. A single simulation year can contain an El Nino event that intensifies bushfire risk while reducing cyclone, flood, wind and storm surge threats.

Moody’s notes the influence of El Nino is becoming harder to predict as the climate warms.

Research suggests warmer conditions may affect the frequency, intensity or impact of future El Ninos, and the combination of climate change and El Nino can make regional temperature and rainfall outcomes more uncertain.

The current El Nino is expected to peak in coming months.

The cyclone pool has received 133,078 claims to date with a total net incurred value of about $1.65 billion, the latest statistics report says.

The most recent season generated claims from cyclones Fina, Hayley, Koji, Luana, Mitchell and Narelle, which was the costliest event.

Narelle, which hit Queensland, the NT and WA as it crossed north Australia, is listed by the ARPC as two events. The first generated incurred claims to date of $3.89 million and the second $57.1 million.

During the June quarter, the Australian Reinsurance Pool Corporation continued to receive and pay claims from storms in previous seasons, including tropical cyclones Jasper and Alfred – the largest event for the scheme since it began in July 2022.

The ARPC says the pool continues to support risk reduction through premium incentives for eligible mitigation measures, with discounts of $9.7 million applied as of June 30, up from $9 million reported last December 31.

The pool reinsures about 3.05 million home buildings, 72,000 strata developments and 99,000 SME buildings, representing more than $2.5 trillion in sums insured.

Total annual cyclone pool premium is about $675 million across home, strata and SME.

As of July 31, ARPC had paid about $1.37 billion in claims.

New Zealand’s Natural Hazards Commission is investing $NZ3.6 million ($2.89 million) in research examining earthquake fires, flood risk, coastal cliff collapse and other threats.

The funding is spread across eight three-year university research programs designed to help protect homes, support better decisions about where and how people live, and reduce the cost of natural hazard damage.

“Every dollar we invest in understanding natural hazards and reducing risk today has the potential to save homeowners and the country many times that amount in future,” commission head of research Natalie Balfour said.

The university programs secured funding from the commission’s grant scheme for studies that contribute to strengthening resilience to natural hazards.

NHC invites applications every three years, with up to $NZ4.5 million ($3.6 million) available to support up to 10 projects.

The latest eight programs will start early next year. Subjects include disaster response and recovery challenges, long-term decisions about strengthening homes, adapting to flood risk, and planning development in hazard-prone areas.

The University of Canterbury will examine how fires could spread after a major earthquake and test different ways of responding, using Greater Wellington as a case study.

“The findings will help emergency managers and communities better prepare for complex disasters,” the commission said.

University of Auckland will undertake five research projects, including one on flood risk impacts and another on predicting coastal cliff collapse.

“Thousands of homes around New Zealand sit close to coastal cliffs, but it can be difficult to tell which areas are most at risk of collapse,” the NHC said. “This program will use drones, imaging technology and computer modelling to identify the conditions that make cliffs unstable and improve how coastal cliff hazards are assessed.

“The findings will help homeowners, councils and planners make better decisions about development and risk on clifftop land.”

The NSW State Insurance Regulatory Authority has called for feedback on whether the workers’ compensation scheme’s psychiatric impairment rating scale is fit for purpose.

A statutory independent review is being led by former NSW chief psychiatrist Murray Wright, who has released an issues paper as he examines whether the rating scale delivers fair, consistent assessments and how it fits within the broader workers’ compensation framework.

The review will consider alternative approaches to assessing whole person impairment after psychological injury.

The regulator says feedback will help shape the review’s next stage and inform recommendations on how permanent impairment from psychological injury should be assessed.

A final report is to be tabled in the NSW parliament next August. Find more information about the review here. Submissions are open until November 13.

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner has launched an inquiry into a Chinese smart glasses app maker after it failed to respond to questions about its safeguarding of personal data.

Shenzhen Qingcheng Future Technology’s HeyCyan mobile app is used with eyewear sold under different brand names by retailers including Amazon and Kmart.

The app is required to activate smart glasses features such as music and call answering, and using the software involves information being collected.

“In the absence of any response from Shenzhen Qingcheng to the OAIC’s preliminary inquiries, I have no assurance that it is protecting personal data of Australians as required by the Privacy Act,” privacy commissioner Carly Kind said.

“The failure ... to respond to the OAIC’s inquiries raises concerns about the entity’s practices, procedures and systems to protect the personal information it holds ... In those circumstances, I considered it was important to commence an investigation so I could utilise my full range of powers to examine this issue, including issuing compulsory information gathering notices.”

From August 12, preliminary enquiries were made with manufacturers and distributors of smart glasses including the Chinese company, Meta, Kmart and Google. They were asked to clarify how the glasses work, including how they record information; who has access to that information; and where the information is stored.

The probe into Shenzhen Qingcheng comes as privacy concerns mount over the use of smart glasses, which Ms Kind has described as “surveillance wearables”.

She says the federal government plans to reform the Privacy Act in “some fundamental ways”, including to broaden the definition of personal information. 

“Given the gaps in Privacy Act coverage with respect to smart glasses, the Australian community is likely to find comfort that the proposed tranche 2 reforms will raise the bar for smart glasses collection,” Ms Kind said.

“These reforms are likely to become increasingly necessary as we face subsequent generations of surveillance wearables and connected devices, from personal assistant gadgets to ambient recording badges.”

New Zealand Labour’s plans for targeting add-on insurance need evidence and careful consideration, with regulations already covering the sector, the Financial Services Federation says.

“The vast majority of providers, including our members, operate with integrity and focus on providing products that meet their customers’ needs,” federation executive director Lyn McMorran said.

“Any proposed changes should build on good practice and address areas where consumers are not being well served.”

If it wins the November 7 election, Labour plans to ban “junk” add-on car insurance, including paint and mechanical breakdown cover “that excludes almost everything that could break down”.

It is also focusing on secret commissions, disclosure of total costs over the life of an agreement, and cancellation rights.

The FSF says the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act already requires consumers to be given upfront information about the total cost of a credit contract, and the Secret Commission Act also applies. Under the credit-related insurance code, members must give consumers at least 14 days to cancel relevant insurance without penalty, it says.

“It is important to distinguish between issues raised requiring new regulation, and those already addressed under existing rules,” Ms McMorran said.

The FSF says last year its members approved an average of 97.5% of mechanical breakdown claims, helping thousands of people manage unexpected repair costs and demonstrating the protection’s value.

Ms McMorran says where poor practices occur, they should be addressed, and the FSF supports regulators taking on businesses that fail to meet their obligations.

“This protects consumers and supports responsible providers who work hard to earn and maintain their customers’ trust,” she said.

Castle Insurance boss Bradley Heath says he is eyeing significant expansion over the next five years as a new capacity deal with Canopius creates fresh opportunities.

As insuranceNEWS.com.au has reported, national underwriting agency Castle will switch from QBE to Canopius capacity on December 1. The business launched a year ago offering home, contents and landlord cover to the intermediated market.

Mr Heath – who is MD of parent company Sure Insurance, which covers regional Queensland – says the first 12 months have gone well.

“In terms of policy numbers, Castle is in the many tens of thousands. What we’ve achieved in one year with Castle is about what it took us five years to achieve with Sure, which is proportionately about right when you think about it.

“The important point here is we’re looking to continue that level of growth and support the broker network.”

Mr Heath says Castle is not trying to “take on the world”, but it can offer an important specialised service.

“We are not going to take on huge amounts of market share from the big operators, but there is a national market there that we’ve got the opportunity to grow into.

“[The deal with Canopius] doesn’t change our core strategy, it just gives us a greater opportunity and at a greater scale down the track.

“We’re eyeing the next five years, and what we can provide to this market, and the scale of what we can do.

“This is about being a specialist and delivering a quality product at a quality price.”

As Castle moves to Canopius capacity, it will update its product disclosure statements and underwriting guidelines.

“We always said we’d review the PDS based on broker feedback, because the brokers are going to tell us exactly what needs to be done,” Mr Heath said.

“So we took the opportunity with Canopius to upgrade the product, and also upgrade some of our acceptance criteria. We’ll be telling brokers about that in due course.”

Other insurers have flagged profitability challenges in the intermediated home space, but Mr Heath says Castle is “satisfied” with current portfolio performance.

“The challenges are not new. They’re quite old in this class, in a country like Australia, where we do have quite a cross-section of events – whether it be bushfire, cyclone, flood, storm, hail.

“This is a country that’s got some extremes, and so that’s why I think a specialist can address that from an underwriting viewpoint, and from a claims management viewpoint.

“I think that’s what our role is: to face those known challenges head on.”

Commission rates will remain unchanged for now, but Mr Heath says the issue will continue to evolve.

“We announced recently that we took the commission to 12.5% on Castle. That’s where we are at the moment, but I think the entire market will just continue to review that. Some underwriters have gone to 10%, and some are still above us too.

“So I think there are probably more changes, at an industry level, over the next 24 months.”

Castle this year introduced a zero-commission option for brokers that prefer to charge a fee.

“Some brokers want it, others don’t want it, and others [want] to have the option of it. There’s quite a spread of thinking on it, and I think brokers in general, with this whole subject across all classes, will think further about it as time goes on.

“There’s an evolution going on, I would imagine, in most brokers’ minds, and that’s a matter for them and their clients.”

The Castle products launched on Ebix’s Sunrise Exchange, but Mr Heath says he plans to get onto other platforms.

“We’re still working on Steadfast Client Trading Platform, some of the technical aspects of that. If our broker panel needs us to be on there, or any other platform, and it’s a viable thing for us, of course we’re going to do that.”

Steadfast owns a majority stake in the business, and Mr Heath says the group’s pending private equity buyout does not affect the running of Castle or Sure.

“It is still very much business as usual, and we’re getting on. There’s no interruption to that.”

Brokers have told the federal government they should not pay a special levy to cover a Compensation Scheme of Last Resort shortfall driven by other sectors.

The National Insurance Brokers Association’s submission to consultation on the funding model also proposes the scheme’s administration costs should be reviewed before a special levy is extended to subsectors with no connection to the losses. 

Revised scheme administration costs for this financial year total $31.1 million, including ombudsman fees, operating expenses and Australian Securities and Investments Commission costs. 

“Every dollar spent administering the scheme is a dollar that does not reach a consumer, and under tier 3 it is a dollar that unconnected subsectors are asked to fund,” NIBA said. 

Treasury has proposed a three-tier “waterfall” model for the levy, which is required as initial estimates for this financial year excluded impacts from the Shield and First Guardian Master Fund failures. 

The first tier taps the sector mainly associated with the losses, the second those “sufficiently connected”, and the third remaining subsectors in “retail-facing financial services”. 

The top tiers for this year’s special levy are the financial advice sector and responsible entities for managed investment schemes. 

Treasury’s consultation paper proposes tier 3 insurance product distributors will be levied about $1.444 million, which is about $100 for each broker. 

NIBA proposes a subsector with no connection should not be levied where its share is smaller than collection costs, and it recommends the government confirm expanded loss recovery powers reach professional indemnity insurers, including those of gatekeepers such as auditors. 

Levy application questions also ask if the viability or sustainability of any sector is threatened by proposed allocations. 

“Viability is the wrong test for an unconnected subsector; the right questions are connection and proportionality,” NIBA said.

The association says broking profession clients help fund a scheme they generally cannot use and it is not aware of any case in which a client has been left uncompensated because professional indemnity insurance did not respond. 

“The CSLR covers personal financial advice, credit and securities dealing, so a household or small business with an unpaid [ombudsman] determination against its insurance broker has no claim on it.”

The scheme was established to pay compensation when an eligible Australian Financial Complaints Authority ruling remains unpaid.

See the NIBA submission here.

QPR Premium Funding regional manager Tony Harris has died aged 74 after a battle with cancer.

In a career spanning 40 years, Melbourne-based Mr Harris worked at Allianz – where he was senior marine underwriter – QBE, CGU and Arteva.

“Throughout those four decades, Tony built ... lasting relationships, earned the trust and respect of those around him, and left an impression on countless people across the insurance community,” QPR said.

“He was so much more than a highly experienced insurance professional. He was a trusted confidant, a generous mentor, a valued colleague and a genuine friend.”

Mr Harris had a “remarkable ability to share his knowledge without ever making you feel like you were being taught”, the company says.

“His guidance was always thoughtful, his perspective valued and his quick wit could lighten even the busiest day. His kindness, experience and generosity of spirit will be deeply missed. Thank you for the knowledge, the friendship, the guidance and the laughs.”

Aviso Specialty has appointed Eric Wojcik as head of capital and guarantee solutions, effective next March.

Mr Wojcik, who will be based in Sydney, has more than 30 years’ experience across banking, project and structured finance, financial risk and surety. Most recently, he has been Marsh Pacific head of surety and global leader for bank-fronted surety.

Aviso Specialty CEO Josh Roach says Mr Wojcik brings experience that is difficult to replicate, and his appointment strengthens the business’ specialist capabilities and the expertise it can provide to clients.

“His appointment is an important step in the development of our capital solutions group and reflects our commitment to continuing to invest in talented people and innovative solutions that help our clients navigate complex challenges,” he said.

Brokers were reminded of the importance of providing detailed information when the profession’s code compliance committee appeared at a conference hosted by insurtech Curium in Sydney last month.

Daniela Kirchlinde and Carli Kidd of the Insurance Brokers Code Compliance Committee told the audience half of the breaches they investigated involved renewals.

“A code is not just a minimum standard but it’s your promise to your client,” Ms Kirchlinde said. “It may seem like rules and audits to you. But for clients, compliance is about confidence and trust in you serving them well.

“That’s where the code comes in – it follows the client through the journey.”

She says the committee is interested in the stories behind the breaches.

“If you provide just bare numbers, you will get a call from us: ‘We don’t understand what this means, tell us the real story.’

“So in the same way as when you report internally to the board and executive management, don’t just say how many breaches you had this year compared to last, but how confident are you that have found the issues causing them and understand how to fix them.”

Ms Kirchlande says brokers need to know how a client has been affected – $1000 may be a lot of money to some customers.

A renewal notice that was not sent due to human error may highlight a host of different breaches, such as lack of clear communication or poor complaints handling.

Various remediation actions may be triggered by one incident. Ten emails going to wrong addresses amounts to 10 incidents but one breach.

Ms Kirchlande says a broker’s incidents register should be available to all staff, authorised representative and distribution agents.

“If you say, ‘It’s a human error, we will instigate staff training', is that good enough? What if it keeps happening? Maybe the system is wrong, maybe guidelines are poor.

“You don’t want complaints going to [the industry ombudsman] – it will cost you money, whether the client was right or you were right. And you want to keep the client. And the client has friends. And there is the brand and social media risk.”

More than 1000 delegates have registered for the sold-out NIBA Convention, up from 890 last year.

The conference, from October 18-20 at RACV Royal Pines on the Gold Coast, features 70 speakers, 119 exhibitors and 44 award finalists.

NIBA CEO Richard Klipin says passing 1000 delegates “shows how much value brokers and their partners place on meeting face to face, learning from each other and working through the issues that matter to their clients”.

At the event, the association will launch new research on the impact of technology and AI, along with the final version of the 2027 Insurance Brokers Code of Practice.

“Releasing the final version at the convention gives members the chance to engage with it directly, with time to prepare before it takes effect in January,” association president Nick Cook said.

The convention will also focus on professional development.

The dedicated pathway program includes opportunities for emerging brokers to build skills, expand networks and connect with experienced professionals and industry leaders.

Mr Cook says this is “central to the future of broking. By investing in their development and showing what a career in broking offers, we can bring more talented people into the profession and help them build long, rewarding careers serving their clients and communities.”

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s Annual Forum next month will focus on “staying ahead of the next wave” of global change.

The corporate regulator says it will examine how Australia can safeguard financial system integrity and maintain confidence for consumers and markets in an environment of accelerating and varied change.

The event at International Convention Centre Sydney will bring together leaders from business, markets, government and the community on November 17-18.

“Economic pressures, geopolitical uncertainty and rapid technological innovation are reshaping our financial system and our markets,” ASIC chair Sarah Court said.

“The challenge for all of us – government, business and regulators – is to address these factors in a way that is front-footed and forward-thinking.”

The forum will examine trust in professional services groups, operational resilience, industry codes, board leadership in a volatile environment and co-ordination between financial regulators. ASIC will also announce its enforcement priorities for next year.

Speakers include federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock. Find out more here.

⦿ Adnan Bhat has joined Swiss Re Corporate Solutions as vice president – global network manager for Asia-Pacific, based in India.

His previous role was in partnerships and digital business at Munich Re in India.

The move comes after Swiss Re announced a strategic partnership with Bajaj General Insurance in India.

He says he will shape and sustain Swiss Re Corporate Solutions’ global partner ecosystem. The role combines strategic partner development, disciplined governance and service oversight. 

⦿ Sonya Febbo has been appointed head of authorised representatives for C&C Australia at Marsh. She has been with Marsh for 15 years as an authorised representative. 

⦿ Justin Geldart has joined Knightcorp Insurance Brokers as account director – financial lines. He joins from Gallagher and is based in Perth. 

“Bringing Justin into the team as account director, financial lines is a deliberate step in building out our specialty offering,” Knightcorp head of enterprise and specialty Andrew Dawson said. 

“Our clients are dealing with more complex and interconnected risks, and they need people who have deep knowledge in specialty classes. 

“Justin further strengthens that expertise, and he’ll work with our brokers and clients on the decisions that matter most to them.” 

⦿ Felix Ukaegbu has joined Lockton as GM – Wellington. He previously spent seven years at Marsh – five in London, then two as chief client officer for risk management in New Zealand.

He says he is “thrilled to be part of the next stage of Lockton’s growth in NZ – strengthening relationships, developing the team and delivering for clients”.

The QBE Foundation has awarded $600,000 to 12 charity and community organisations across Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific through its local grants program.

The projects will each receive $50,000 to strengthen inclusion and climate resilience.

Chris Esson, co-chair of the Australia Pacific QBE Foundation, says the more than 500 expressions of interest received this year show the “depth of commitment and innovation across the community sector. Our annual local grants program enables community organisations to expand their impact and deliver lasting benefits to the people and places that need support most.

“The 12 organisations selected this year are addressing complex challenges, strengthening community resilience and creating opportunities for people to thrive. We are proud to support their efforts and look forward to seeing the positive outcomes their initiatives will deliver.”

Grant recipients by category are:

Climate resilience

• Resilient Lismore
• Powerwells Foundation
• Central Victorian Biolinks Alliance
• Community Broadcasting Association of Australia

Inclusion

• DV Safe Phone
• The Australian Literacy and Numeracy Foundation
• Launch Housing
• Aurora Education Foundation

QBE employees’ choice

• Dads Speak
• KidsXpress
• Feel the Magic
• Somewhere to Go

Applications for the 2027 local grants program will open early next year.

QBE has joined the Australian Red Cross and Save the Children’s 54 Reasons operation to form Kids Ready, Community Ready – a child-centred disaster resilience partnership.

The initiative brings together educators, students and community stakeholders to create a new approach to supporting children affected by disasters.

The organisations say support for children “across preparedness, response and recovery efforts often remains fragmented” and Kids Ready, Community Ready will address this by connecting Australian Red Cross’ disaster preparedness education with recovery and participation programs delivered by 54 Reasons, enabled through the support of the QBE Foundation.

“Children experience disasters differently, yet they are too often overlooked in preparedness and recovery planning,” Australian Red Cross emergency services lead Carolyne Doherty said.

“Kids Ready, Community Ready recognises that resilience starts long before an emergency and that children are not passive recipients of support. By equipping children with practical skills, knowledge and confidence, we’re helping build stronger communities that are better prepared for future disasters.”

QBE Foundation co-chair Julie Starley says the partnership combines complementary expertise to provide more connected support for children before, during and after disasters.

“Building resilient communities requires sustained collaboration and support across every stage of a disaster,” she said. “Through Kids Ready, Community Ready, we are proud to help bring together leading organisations to create a more co-ordinated, child-centred approach that supports communities when it matters most.”