Insurer refuses to let customer withdraw suspect claim
Suncorp refused to let a customer withdraw a motor insurance claim, instead choosing to decline it on the basis of fraud.
The insured claimed for damage to a Mercedes car, saying it was driven through an intersection at 70kph, and there was a collision with a third-party vehicle that went through a red light.
But Suncorp deployed a forensic investigator who found inconsistencies with the account of events.
The investigator believed a collision had occurred at the location but not in the manner described, and that the insured’s vehicle was stationary when impacted.
Suncorp requested to reinterview the claimant, but they chose not to take part, instead requesting to withdraw the claim.
The insurer denied that request and declined the claim on the basis that it had been made fraudulently.
The claimant took the case to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), arguing that as they had asked for the claim to be withdrawn before it was declined, the insurer should have honoured the request. This would have avoided a declined claim or allegation of fraud being recorded.
AFCA ruled the insurer was entitled to deny the request, and that it was correct to decline the claim.
“Given the insurer was effectively able to decline the claim before the complainants requested it be withdrawn, I am satisfied the insurer was entitled to continue with its decision to decline despite the complainants’ request to withdraw the claim.”
But it says that Suncorp has not established the claim was fraudulent.
“The forensic evidence is compelling and conflicts with the version of events supplied by the complainants,” the determination says.
“However, a financial motive has not been established with a high degree of certainty, and other discrepancies and concerns are insufficient to establish an allegation of fraud.
“As such, I am not satisfied the insurer has established an allegation of fraud. While it is entitled to decline the claim, it must remove any reference to fraud from the claim decision.”
Click here to read the full ruling.