A WA homeowner whose property was damaged by Cyclone Seroja in 2021 will not have his roof claim paid after it was found to have pre-existing wear and tear.

The complainant lodged the claim on April 11 2021, after the category three cyclone hit his home with winds up to 170kph. 

Suncorp agreed to cover some of the damage and offered the insured $73,631 for the repairs based on a scope of works plus a 5% contingency.

But the insurer did not cover damage to the roof, stating that there had been “multiple contributing factors” to its condition, including corrosion, wear and tear, and defects, which were excluded from the policy. 

A complainant-appointed engineer, referred to as ME, says the cyclone was the proximate cause of the damage, citing that the roof’s structure exhibited “signs of load distress consistent with having undergone overstress”. 

ME says none of the roof’s cladding sheets were dislodged during the cyclone and that the structure had been “well built”.

The insurer engaged with an engineer, referred to as CR, who says that the cyclone damage was “relatively minor”, highlighting that there had been no impact damage to the roof’s sheeting or separation of its framing.

CR says the primary source of the damage pre-dated the cyclone, noting heavy corrosion on the roof’s sheeting and that the structure had been unsealed with no gable ends or soffit linings.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) acknowledged that both experts provided compelling information but preferred the insurer’s explanation for the cause of the damage.

AFCA says photographic evidence of the roof showed that it was “aged and corroded”, with rusty nails in the unsealed sheeting indicating that the roof had been raised before the storm.

“I am persuaded CR’s findings are plausible, logical and consistent with the exchanged information,” AFCA said.

“The absence of soffit linings in certain areas also meant the roof was likely vulnerable to upward draft winds and some damage from the cyclone.

“However, I am not satisfied the cyclone was the proximate cause. I acknowledge it may have damaged the roof, however, I am not persuaded it was the main cause of this damage.”

AFCA says Suncorp was entitled to decline the claim based on its exclusions relating to pre-existing damage and wear and tear. 

However, the ruling required the insurer to increase its contingency fee to 15% to compensate for the transfer of risk for repairs and the loss of a lifetime guarantee for approved repairs. The uplifted contingency brought the overall settlement offer to $84,675.

Click here for the ruling.