Insurer Rejects Claim Over Diesel Fluid Mix-Up

1

The policyholder argued that according to the product disclosure statement (PDS), only "incorrect fuel usage" was excluded, and as AdBlue is technically not a fuel, her claim should be valid. Additional grievances arose after alleging the insurer’s tow service inflicted further damage to her car, necessitating a new steering rack and wheel realignment.

Suncorp acknowledged the issue with its initial claim rejection, where the decision was based solely on the original PDS. However, the insurer pointed to a supplementary product disclosure statement (SPDS), which explicitly excludes coverage for damage resulting from using fluids not recommended by the vehicle's manufacturer. This key differentiation was reportedly communicated to the policyholder during her policy renewal.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) sided with Suncorp, determining that the insurer did not mislead the customer about her claim status. While Suncorp admitted to referencing outdated PDS wording initially, AFCA deemed their reliance on the updated SPDS appropriate and found no obligation for the insurer to cover the incident. Additionally, AFCA found limited evidence to support the policyholder's accusations regarding damage caused by the towing service, reinforcing Suncorp's account of a winched, non-dragged vehicle recovery.

Despite these rulings, AFCA ordered Suncorp to compensate the policyholder $3000 for delay-induced inconveniences during the claim process, which left her without her vehicle for an extended period, citing the resulting undue stress and hassle.

This case highlights the importance of clear communication and understanding of policy amendments, emphasizing the role supplemental documents play during insurance assessments. Consumers are reminded to review documentation thoroughly during renewals to grasp the full scope of their insurance protections and exclusions.

Published:Wednesday, 16th Apr 2025
Source: Paige Estritori

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

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

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

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

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

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