Thank you for all of your help. The service was outstanding - all of my questions were answered promptly, everything ran smoothly

M. Elliot
  1. Article
  2. Related Articles
  3. Related Practice Areas

Insurance Law - Rainstorm, Flood Insurance and Cyclone Insurance Claims - Part 3

Date: February 02, 2011

Authors: Michael Pickering B.A., LL.B. (Hons.), LL.M., M. A.

The recent flooding in Queensland and Victoria has led to much uncertainty concerning the scope of cover of insurance policies when dealing with different types of flood events. We hope this article wil be informative for you and help shed some light on this complex area of law. Should you have any questions or queries do not hesitate to contact LAC Lawyers.

Flood Insurance and the affect of 'Unusual Terms'

There is one final point to consider.

The Insurance Contract Act obliges insurers to particularly notify insured’s of what is regarded as an “unusual term” prior to the contract of insurance being entered into. If such notification does not take place, insurers cannot rely upon such an unusual term to deny a claim. To do so amounts to a breach of the duty of utmost good faith owed to insureds by insurers. The notification must amount to a description and explanation of the effect of the term rather merely than notifying the term itself.

Having regard to the complexity of flood coverage, it might be possible to argue that insures operating in Queensland were obliged to specifically point out the difference between rain, flash flooding, riverine flooding, storm and cyclone cover and specifically explain to insureds, in clear English, what amounts to riverine flooding and the fact that is it is not covered. If this has not occurred, it may still be possible for certain insureds to successfully argue that insurers cannot rely upon the traditional flood  exclusion.

Assessing such complex claims always gives rise the exercise of discretion on the part of the insurance claims departments. It is for this reason that politicians  are asking insurers to look at insurance claims with compassion. On the other hand, requires insures to pay for flood claims where those insurers have not taken any premium for riverine flood risk is not necessarily a fair outcome either. The inevitable result will be a future reduction in the availability of wide spread flood cover or the increase in insurance premiums required for such cover. Neither outcome is in the best interest of insureds.

The better solution is for insureds to be aware of the insurance policy cover they are buying for home and contents and, wherever possible, choose those insurers who have not excluded any flood loss.

In relation to the problem of uninsured flood loss cover, the better solution is to discourage construction in flood (or fire) prone arrears or to insure that such construction is, to the greatest extent possible, flood or fire proof. The lessens learned as a result of Cyclone Tracy in 1974 lead to very effective cyclone – resistant building construction methods being introduced into the Northern Territory. The tragic events of Black Saturday in Victoria have also seen the introduction of tougher construction codes for houses in bush fire prone areas.

The article is not intended to provide specific legal advice. It is intended to provide guidance only. Persons reading this article should be aware that the legal statements may not be applicable to their individual situations.

  1. Article
  2. Related Articles
  3. Related Practice Areas