Car Collector Fails in Bid for $122k Insurance Windfall

The information on this website is general in nature and does not take into account your objectives, financial situation, or needs. Consider seeking personal advice from a licensed adviser before acting on any information.

The dispute began when the owner's 2005 HSV Coupe GTO Z Series succumbed to flames in March of the previous year. RACQ Insurance accepted the total loss and initially valued the vehicle at $68,000.

However, the unsatisfied owner declined this offer, leading to an independent valuation which described the car as being in “good condition for its age and mileage” despite its 315,000km on the odometer.

Although comparable lower-mileage vehicles were advertised above $81,000, the heavy usage severely reduced its collectible appeal, the independent valuer noted. Conclusively, the evaluator deemed the insurer's offer reasonable.

The car owner contested this, alleging RACQ Insurance's assessment was flawed, particularly regarding the engine type and the car's rarity as one of only 60 manual transmission models, asserting its condition was excellent.

In response, RACQ revised their offer to $78,000 factoring in the vehicle's unique modifications and reconditioned engine, but the claimant stood firm in his refusal.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), upon review, sided with the insurer. AFCA deemed RACQ Insurance's valuation and the independent assessment to be “logical, well-considered and helpful.”

According to Glass's Guide referenced by the AFCA, the vehicle's maximum estimated market value could not exceed $58,100, considering its age and mileage. Although rare, evidence was insufficient to justify a $200,000 evaluation.

The AFCA stated, “The complainant has not provided persuasive evidence to demonstrate the vehicle's worth is beyond what the insurer offered. Under such conditions, adjusting the settlement upward would not be justifiable.”

Reference: Original findings from the Australian Financial Complaints Authority's ruling were sourced from RACQ Insurance's appeal letter. Read more about the decision here.

Published:Wednesday, 24th Jul 2024
Author: Paige Estritori

Please Note: We do not endorse any specific products or companies. Some content is sourced from third parties, including press releases, and may not be independently verified for accuracy or completeness.

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

Victoria’s Strata Commission Debate Moves Into a New Phase

21 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

Victoria’s strata reform agenda has taken another important turn, with consumer advocates continuing to push for a ban on insurance-related commissions paid to owners corporation managers after the state government chose to defer immediate action on the issue. - read more

Insurance Code Rewrite Could Lift Standards for Tradies

21 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

Australian tradies could soon see an important shift in how general insurers are expected to communicate, manage claims and resolve disputes, with the industry’s General Insurance Code of Practice moving closer to a major rewrite. - read more

ASIC Warning Highlights Ongoing Delays in Super Death Benefit Claims

21 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

ASIC’s latest warning to superannuation trustees is a timely reminder that life insurance is only as valuable as the claims process behind it. The regulator’s June 2026 progress review found that while many trustees have improved how they manage death benefit claims, some are still moving too slowly on basic service standards for grieving families. - read more

Rural Insurance Costs Face Fresh Scrutiny in Queensland

21 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

Insurance affordability in south-west Queensland has moved from local frustration to a national competition issue, after Maranoa MP David Littleproud lodged a formal complaint with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission over sharp premium increases across the region. - read more

Why Policy Exclusions Matter Before a Claim

21 Jun 2026: Paige Estritori

A recent Victorian Supreme Court decision is a timely reminder that having property or business interruption cover does not automatically mean every costly disruption will be insured. The case involved a glass reprocessing business whose site was taken over by Victoria’s environmental regulator in early 2020 after concerns about fire hazards, contamination and risks to public health and the environment. - read more

Click for more Insurance News