AFCA Upholds Fair Evaluation in Insurance Claim Dispute

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.

In a case brought to attention, the claimant, who secured his coverage via superannuation, applied for a $9300 monthly policy intended for a two-year coverage span back in March 2020.

The claimant's struggle began in August 2019 when his general practitioner declared him medically unfit for work due to "significant psychological distress," primarily catalyzed by workplace bullying.

As a recourse, the individual took personal leave in August followed by paternity leave in October of the same year. Although he resumed work in October 2020, he had to suspend his professional engagements again by December.

In September 2021, the claimant submitted a request for income protection benefits, citing an adjustment disorder diagnosed with mixed anxiety and depression as the reason inhibiting his capacity to work.

However, MetLife rejected the claim in July 2022, accusing the claimant of inaccurately representing his medical history. The insurance provider argued that the applicant falsely stated he hadn’t been “diagnosed with or sought medical advice or treatment” for psychological issues at the time of application.

MetLife asserted that the applicant already exhibited psychological distress, hindering his work capability long-term, and had they known, the policy would not have been issued. They determined his stress related symptoms equated “to a psychological condition.”

The claimant countered, maintaining he neither identified with a history of psychological ailments during his application process, nor would a typical person in his context.

AFCA elaborated, saying although the complainant experienced "significant stress in 2019," ordinary perception does not always align stress with a psychological or clinical mental health condition. The inquiry focused on awareness of any conditions at the time, not diagnosis existence.

AFCA highlighted that the treating GP did not insist on mental health assessments commonly expected when symptoms emerge, and the sole "treatment" employed was voluntarily steering clear of the work environment, a decision lacking a formal diagnosis.

They elucidated that “Even if the answers given were not actually true (because with the benefit of hindsight the complainant was in fact suffering from a psychological or mental health condition), the panel accepted a reasonable person in the circumstances would also have reached the same belief as the complainant did.”

Following the conclusion, AFCA mandates MetLife to process and revisit the claimant’s submission and communicate the outcome to Hostplus, the coverage trustee, within a 60-day frame. The original content was reported by the Australian Financial Review.

Published:Friday, 1st Nov 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

Why Builder Insolvencies Are Becoming a Strata Insurance Issue

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh reporting on Australia's construction sector has highlighted a problem that strata communities cannot afford to treat as background noise: builder and trade contractor failures remain a live risk for apartment buildings, particularly where major repairs, defect rectification or insurance reinstatement works are required. - read more

Why Rebuild Cost Pressure Matters for Strata Insurance

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Fresh attention on Australia's construction cost environment is a useful reminder for strata communities that insurance adequacy is not just about the premium charged at renewal. For owners corporations and body corporates, the more important question is whether the insured value of the building would still be enough to rebuild, reinstate common property and meet associated professional costs after a major loss. - read more

Why Clearer Insurance Communication Matters for Employers

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

ASIC’s latest scrutiny of insurance in superannuation communications is a timely reminder that life cover is only valuable when people understand when it applies, what it pays, and where the gaps may sit. For employers, CFOs and HR leaders, this is not just a superannuation fund issue. It goes directly to workforce wellbeing, benefit design and the way organisations explain financial protection to their people. - read more

What Stronger Insurer Results Mean for Tradies at Renewal Time

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

APRA’s latest general insurance statistics point to a sector that is in a stronger financial position than it was during the worst of recent inflation, repair-cost and catastrophe pressures. For Australian tradies, that sounds positive at first glance: a well-capitalised insurance market is better placed to pay claims, support recovery after major loss events and keep products available across higher-risk occupations and regions. - read more

What Simpler Advice Rules May Mean for Life Insurance

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

The latest stage of Australia’s financial advice reform debate has direct implications for life insurance, particularly for people who hold cover through superannuation or have avoided seeking advice because of cost and complexity. The policy direction is aimed at making limited, practical guidance easier to access, including through super funds and financial institutions, while still maintaining consumer protections. - read more

Click for more Insurance News