The Queensland floods inquiry has heard that while some claimants have been left waiting for dispute resolution services for up to three months, insurers are not obliged to meet the standards of the industry’s code of practice during times of natural disasters.

In his opening statement to the inquiry, Counsel assisting the Commission Peter Callaghan SC said the code is voluntary and insurance companies have the right to bypass it.

“In times of catastrophe or disaster and when faced with an unusual number of claims the code allows that insurers may not be able to meet the standards which would ordinarily apply,” he said.

“It requires, instead, that insurers establish their own internal processes for responding to such situations, but still insists that insurers are to deal with clients quickly, professionally, practically and compassionately.”

Mr Callaghan says due to these concessions, the commission will instead have to measure complaints against timeliness, the insurers’ ability to communicate with clients and whether a claimant has been inappropriately dissuaded from pursuing a claim.

In the first round of hearings, the inquiry heard how one business owner had to wait more than three months to have his claim reassessed through the claims process.

Thomas Fischer initially understood there would be a backlog given the exceptional nature of events, but never expected it to take eight months from the time of filing the complaint to the dispute resolution phase.

“We made no phone calls [and] no contact to try and make our claim go through any quicker than anyone else’s, but when we got to the dispute stage and they weren’t complying with their own 15 business day timeframes, I don’t think that’s really acceptable,” he told the commission.

The court heard how the dispute had been passed around to three different officers, which kept delaying the process.

“I don’t think putting the claim to three different officers is conducive to making a decision, and I don’t think anyone really at any stage has taken ownership of it, of the claim,” Mr Fischer said.

“We’ve had letters from various people and emails but, you know, I think no-one really wants to take responsibility.”

The inquiry will continue this week with further testimony from claimants at hearings in Brisbane.