More Information

INSURANCE HUB

Insurance coverage dispute lawyers Australia

You did everything right. You took out a policy, paid your premiums on time, and when something went wrong you made a claim — only to be told no. Or offered a fraction of what you’re owed. Or met with silence that stretches on for weeks.

That outcome is not just frustrating. For many people it is genuinely devastating. A denied income protection claim can mean choosing between bills. A disputed building claim can leave a family living in a damaged home. A rejected settlement can mean a business that does not recover.

Fair Go Australia helps Australians challenge unfair insurance decisions. Our specialist lawyers work exclusively on the claimant side — no win, no fee, Australia-wide.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR RIGHTS

What is an insurance coverage dispute?

An insurance coverage dispute arises when an insurer refuses to pay, significantly underpays, or places unreasonable conditions on a claim that a policyholder believes is valid under their policy. These disputes can be challenged through internal review, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), or litigation in the courts.

Insurers operate commercial businesses. They have financial incentives to minimise claims and, in some cases, to apply policy terms in ways that favour their balance sheet over your entitlement. That does not make their decisions correct — and it certainly does not make them final.

Under s.13 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), both parties to an insurance contract owe each other a duty of utmost good faith. That duty applies to how the insurer assesses and responds to your claim. When an insurer invokes exclusion clauses selectively, delays without legitimate reason, or denies a claim based on a technical reading of fine print that was never properly explained to you, there is a real question as to whether that duty has been honoured.

The gap between what an insurer says your policy covers and what it actually covers — properly understood, properly applied — is where these disputes live.

WHEN INSURERS GET IT WRONG

Common reasons insurers deny or dispute claims

A denial is usually dressed up in policy language. But the stated reason for a refusal is a starting point for scrutiny, not an immovable outcome. Below are the most common grounds insurers use — and why each one is frequently contestable.

  • Non-disclosure or misrepresentation at application — the insurer argues you failed to disclose a material fact, but whether the omission was genuinely material and whether the insurer was actually prejudiced are separate legal questions.
  • Exclusion clause invoked without adequate prior disclosure — many claimants are denied under exclusions buried in fine print they were never clearly walked through.
  • Pre-existing condition — common in income protection and health-related policies; whether a condition was legally required to be disclosed is often far more nuanced than the insurer's assessment implies.
  • Dispute over the cause of loss — the insurer accepts something happened but disputes whether it qualifies as a covered peril; causation arguments can often be challenged with expert evidence.
  • Failure to take reasonable precautions — a vague and frequently overused basis for denial; what constitutes reasonable in the circumstances is a legal question.
  • Depreciated payout rather than replacement value — the insurer pays but uses depreciated value when your policy entitles you to replacement cost.
  • Unreasonable delay amounting to constructive denial — an insurer that holds a claim in limbo for months without making a decision may itself be breaching the duty of utmost good faith.
  • Dispute over whether the loss falls within the policy period — timing arguments are common in property and liability claims and are often more contestable than they first appear.

An insurer’s stated reason for denial is a starting point for challenge — not a final answer.

ELIGIBILITY

Do you have grounds to dispute your insurer's decision?

Not every disappointed claimant has a viable dispute — but many do, and many do not realise it. You may have grounds to challenge your insurer’s decision if any of the following apply:

  • Your policy was in force at the time the loss occurred
  • The type of loss appears to fall within the insuring clause on its face
  • The denial relies on an exclusion that was not clearly disclosed or explained when you took out the policy
  • The insurer has delayed responding to your claim beyond any reasonable timeframe
  • The settlement amount offered does not reflect the actual value of your loss
  • The insurer has invoked non-disclosure provisions without establishing you genuinely prejudiced them
  • You were not given a reasonable opportunity to correct or clarify any alleged misstatement before denial
  • The insurer's overall conduct suggests a breach of the duty of utmost good faith under s.13 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth)

If any of these apply to your situation, your insurer’s decision may be challengeable. Use our free Claim Eligibility Checker to get an initial read on your options.

Use our Claim Eligibility Checker

THE DISPUTE PROCESS

How to dispute an insurance coverage decision

There is a structured escalation path for insurance disputes in Australia. Understanding which stage you are at — and what your options are — is the first step to taking back control.

Step 1 — Internal dispute resolution

Before escalating externally, you are required to lodge a complaint through the insurer’s internal dispute resolution (IDR) process. Under ASIC Regulatory Guide 271, insurers must respond to most complaints within 30 days. This is a mandatory first step and creates a formal record useful if you proceed further.

Step 2 — Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA)

If internal dispute resolution does not resolve the matter, AFCA provides free external dispute resolution. AFCA replaced the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) in 2018 and is the single external forum for insurance complaints. Its determinations are binding on insurers. Monetary limits currently extend to $1.085 million for most insurance disputes. AFCA complaints must be lodged within two years of the insurer’s final response.

Step 3 — Legal proceedings

Where a claim exceeds AFCA’s monetary limits or involves a complex commercial policy, litigation in the Federal Court of Australia or the relevant State Supreme Court may be available. Knowing whether AFCA or litigation is the right route is not always obvious — the strategic decision matters, and specialist advice can significantly affect your outcome.

A dispute with your insurer about a coverage decision is separate from a negligence claim against an insurance broker who gave you deficient advice. If a broker’s failure to advise is part of your situation, see our page on insurance broker negligence →

WHAT YOU CAN RECOVER

What compensation or remedies can you pursue?

The most direct remedy is payment of the full claim — the amount the insurer should have paid in the first place. Where a claim has been unreasonably delayed, you may also be entitled to interest on the outstanding amount. Under s.57 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), an insurer who is liable to pay a claim must pay interest from the date it was bound to pay — a provision frequently overlooked by claimants acting without legal advice.

Where an insurer’s denial has caused additional loss beyond the claim itself — for example, a business that suffered further financial damage because insurance proceeds were withheld during a critical period — consequential losses may also be recoverable in some circumstances, depending on causation.

Through AFCA, claimants can also seek non-financial loss compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by the insurer’s conduct, subject to capped limits.

Australian law does not currently recognise a standalone bad faith tort against insurers. However, unreasonable insurer conduct — delays without justification, selective application of exclusions, failure to investigate properly — is taken seriously by both AFCA and the courts, and can affect outcomes and costs orders.

DON’T MISS YOUR WINDOW

How long do you have to dispute your insurer's decision?

⚠ Act before time runs out

Insurance disputes are subject to multiple overlapping time limits. Most policies contain internal notification conditions requiring you to notify the insurer of a loss promptly — sometimes within 30 days of the event. AFCA complaints must generally be lodged within two years of receiving the insurer’s final response letter. Court proceedings are typically subject to a six-year limitation period under the relevant state Limitation Act, but policy-specific time bars can be significantly shorter — some as short as 12 months. Missing any of these deadlines may permanently extinguish your right to challenge the insurer’s decision. If you are unsure whether your window is still open, contact our team immediately for a free assessment.

Get a Free Case Evaluation

WHY FAIR GO AUSTRALIA

Why choose Fair Go Australia for your insurance coverage dispute?

We are not a general practice firm that handles insurance disputes on the side. Professional negligence and insurance coverage disputes are what we do — and we act exclusively for claimants. We never act for insurers.

That means when we assess your claim, we are looking at it from the same perspective you are: whether the insurer got it right, and if not, what the strongest challenge looks like. Our lawyers understand both the AFCA pathway and the litigation pathway, and they know which one suits which situation. That strategic judgment is not a small thing — the route you take can significantly affect your outcome and your timeline.

For most people, cost is a genuine concern. That is why we work on a no-win, no-fee basis. There is no financial barrier to getting proper advice, and no surprise bill if the claim does not succeed.

Our lawyers operate nationally. Insurance is a national industry — the same insurer that denied your claim in Brisbane writes policies in Perth, Melbourne, and Sydney. We are equipped to handle disputes across every state and territory.

✔No Win No Fee✔Free Evaluation✔Confidential✔Australia-Wide

Has your insurer denied or underpaid your claim?

Don’t accept an unfair outcome. Get specialist advice at no cost to you.

We respond to all enquiries within 1 business day.

Get a Free Case Evaluation

YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED

Frequently asked questions about insurance coverage disputes

Yes. An insurer’s initial denial is not the end of the road. In most cases you have the right to request an internal review, escalate to AFCA for free external dispute resolution, or — depending on the size and nature of the claim — pursue litigation. Many disputes that were initially refused are overturned at the AFCA stage. The key is acting before any applicable time limits expire and presenting your challenge with the right supporting evidence and legal argument.
The duty of utmost good faith is codified in s.13 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth). It requires both the insurer and the insured to act honestly and fairly toward each other throughout the life of the policy — including when a claim is made. Where an insurer breaches this duty by applying policy terms unreasonably or denying a claim without genuine investigation, it may affect the enforceability of the denial and the remedies available to you.
AFCA is free for complainants. There is no cost to lodge a complaint or participate in the process. AFCA’s determinations, if accepted by the complainant, are binding on the insurer. AFCA operates within monetary limits — currently up to $1.085 million for most insurance complaints — and time limits apply, so prompt action matters.
These are two separate legal pathways. Disputing a coverage decision challenges whether the insurer correctly applied your policy to your claim. A claim against an insurance broker challenges whether the broker gave you competent advice when you took out the policy — for example, by recommending coverage that was inadequate for your actual situation or failing to explain critical exclusions. Both can arise from the same factual situation.
It varies. A straightforward AFCA complaint that is well-prepared can resolve in three to six months. More complex disputes — particularly those involving large commercial claims or detailed causation arguments — can take considerably longer. Litigation, if it comes to that, operates on its own timetable. The most important thing is not to delay starting the process — time limits are real, and the earlier you get specialist advice, the more options tend to be available.
Through AFCA, non-financial loss — including distress and inconvenience caused by an insurer’s poor handling of a claim — is a recognised head of compensation, subject to capped limits. In litigation, general damages for non-financial loss are harder to establish in a pure contract context, though the insurer’s conduct may still affect costs orders and other outcomes.
AFCA’s monetary jurisdiction for insurance disputes currently extends to $1.085 million in most categories. Where your claim exceeds this threshold, or involves a complex commercial policy outside AFCA’s scope, legal proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia or the relevant State Supreme Court may be the appropriate pathway. Specialist legal advice is essential before taking that step — the strategic and financial considerations are significant.

Related pages

Insurance Hub  |  Insurance broker negligence  |  Failure to advise on coverage  |  Economic loss claims

Our goal is to help people in the best way possible. this is a basic principle in every case and cause for success. contact us today for a free consultation. 

Practice Areas

Newsletter

Sign up to our newsletter