Irene lodged a claim for home contents including a laptop, jewellery, coins and pottery in March 2023, followed by a vehicle claim on July 4.
The insurance company paid out on each, then sought to recover the money when it realised the claims were probably fraudulent.
The $10,000 it wanted back was made up of $3717 in the home contents claim, $5100 in the vehicle payout, $1273 in costs incurred with a mechanic for the vehicle claim, and just under $200 in disposal costs for the vehicle, less $260 in premiums Irene paid on the vehicle policy after it was voided from the date of the alleged fraudulent contents claim.
The decision did not specify whether the claims were linked to alleged damage or theft.
A year after lodging the claims, Irene told the insurer her home contents claim was false.
She later raised a defence that the confession itself was false, which Thompson said was “unusual”.
In reaching her conclusion, she considered defences raised by Irene, including that she believed the interview by the insurer’s agent was conducted using a “discredited interview process”.
“However, she was not able to explain to me what was wrong with the process,” Thompson said.
She had listened to the recorded interview in which the interviewer introduced himself, said he was there to assist the insurance company with reopening the claims, said it involved collecting information, checked that Irene was comfortable with him being there and advised her that she was entitled to a support...
Irene lodged a claim for home contents including a laptop, jewellery, coins and pottery in March 2023, followed by a vehicle claim on July 4. The insurance company paid out on each, then sought to...