Miscommunication costs

Check changes to insurance documents are understood and recorded correctly.

Miscommunication costs

Three years after arranging truck insurance through its financial adviser, a company asked its financial adviser to change the policy to include cover for the cost of a temporary truck when its usual truck was off the road. However, the adviser thought the company wanted cover for any rental vehicles it could hire, so this cover was added to the insurance.

Later, when the usual truck was off the road, the company discovered it didn’t have the cover it expected. It questioned this and the adviser explained that the company had been offered loss of use cover several times, and the company had said it didn’t want to pay for this additional cover due to the high cost. Instead, the adviser believed the company had asked for commercial vehicle cover for rental vehicles.

Even if the adviser had made a mistake, the company didn’t lose money, as the correct insurance cover would not have paid the full cost of the rental truck ($7,634.44). The company had paid lower insurance premiums for 5 years and the insurer had offered it $3000. This meant that, even if the company had asked for cover for a temporary truck 5 years earlier, the company had already been compensated for the potential loss.

Complaint not upheld

See the full case study.