AFCA Upholds Insurer’s Decision in Breast Cancer Claim Case

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 woman was diagnosed with cancer in her right breast on October 5 of last year, followed by the discovery of cancer in her left breast eight days later. She filed claims under her critical illness policy that she had obtained on July 17.

However, TAL Life, her insurance provider, rejected the claims based on the policy's three-month qualifying period for cancer coverage.

In its ruling, AFCA noted that the policy had provisions to potentially waive the qualifying period if the policyholder could prove they were insured either under a previous TAL policy or by another insurer for the same events, right before their new coverage commenced.

The claimant contended that she had cancer coverage through an insurance policy provided by her husband's employer. She presented a letter from the employer affirming that she was covered under a "life, accident, critical illness, and medical insurance" scheme from August 2020 until June last year. Additionally, she showed documentation indicating her husband’s policy did include critical illness coverage for spouses, encompassing cancer.

While AFCA accepted the availability of this cancer coverage, it was not convinced that she held such coverage "immediately before the current policy began." It also noted she had failed to disclose her previous insurance when applying for the new policy with TAL Life.

"There is no information before me about the extent of the critical illness cover the complainant had, if any, through her husband's employer’s insurance arrangements," AFCA’s ombudsman stated.

"Furthermore, it appears that any cover she might have had ceased about a month before the new policy started. I am not convinced there was 'continuity of cover' as suggested by the complainant."

The ombudsman expressed AFCA’s sympathy towards the claimant, especially given that the diagnoses occurred "very close to the end of the qualifying period." Nonetheless, he emphasized that there was no valid reason for the qualifying period to be dismissed.

"The qualifying period is reasonably short and its existence is not unjust. These terms are part of all insurance policies and they draw necessary boundaries. The enforcement of these terms is not inherently unfair," the ombudsman elaborated.

For a more detailed account of the ruling, refer to the original report by AFCA.

Published:Wednesday, 4th Sep 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

What NZ’s snow injury surge says about protecting your pay

21 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

New Zealand’s winter injury data is a timely reminder that a day off can become a financial event very quickly. Insurance Business has reported that snow sports injury claims reached a five-year high, with ACC accepting 8,309 skiing claims at a cost of $32 million and 5,425 snowboarding claims at a cost of $14 million for 2025. For households that rely on regular wages, the issue is not only the medical bill. It is the income interruption that can follow. - read more

What a Policy Access Dispute Means for Income Protection Customers

21 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

A recent New Zealand life insurance dispute has put a practical but often overlooked issue in the spotlight: having cover is only part of financial protection. Policyholders also need to know who owns the policy, how documents can be accessed, and what happens when urgent health circumstances arise. - read more

Netstrata Proceedings Put Strata Insurance Governance Back Under the Microscope

18 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

NSW Fair Trading’s criminal proceedings against Network Strata Services Pty Ltd, trading as Netstrata, have pushed strata governance and insurance transparency back into the national spotlight. The regulator alleges the company and its director and licensee in charge breached statutory obligations connected with strata scheme management in New South Wales, including alleged failures around conflicts of interest, undisclosed financial benefits and information provided to the regulator. - read more

Broker Disclosure Debate Puts Small Business Questions Back on the Table

18 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

A fresh dispute over the proposed Insurance Brokers Code of Practice has sharpened the focus on transparency for Australian small businesses. Industry figure John Trowbridge has criticised gaps in the draft code, particularly around whether brokers should disclose commissions and other remuneration to all clients, not only those captured by narrower product or client categories. - read more

AFCA Income Protection Decision Highlights a Hidden Risk for Variable Earners

18 Jul 2026: Paige Estritori

A recent Australian Financial Complaints Authority decision has put a spotlight on a detail that can be easy to overlook: how an income protection policy defines income. In the case, a policyholder receiving payments under an employer-arranged group income protection policy argued that regular sales commissions should be counted when calculating his pre-disability income. - read more

Click for more Insurance News