However, a report from Lloyd’s Australia's forensic engineer countered this claim. It concluded that the rainfall levels were insufficient to have caused the reported damage. The engineer identified that the cracking in the rendering was a result of inadequate design provisions, which failed to mitigate stress accumulation due to volumetric changes in the wall.
Further analysis pointed to long-term water ingress issues, evidenced by the presence of efflorescence, a white mineral deposit. Additionally, water staining on the eaves aligned with findings of blocked downpipes and gutters, indicating maintenance neglect, rather than storm impact.
This case underscores the importance of regular property maintenance and thorough construction inspections before insurance claims. The findings demonstrate how insurers can leverage detailed assessments to differentiate between damage caused by natural events and that caused by other factors like neglect or poor construction practices. Therefore, it holds significant implications for both homeowners and the insurance industry regarding the conditions under which claims are assessed and potentially denied.
The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) upheld the insurer's decision, emphasising the engineer’s plausible explanations and the historical nature of the damage. The ruling highlights the insurer's right to refuse claims when lack of maintenance contributes to the damage. This decision may prompt other homeowners to reassess and enhance their maintenance routines to ensure coverage in genuine storm damage scenarios. Moving forward, it will be crucial for homeowners to maintain comprehensive records of property upkeep and for insurers to continue refining their assessment protocols to ensure just claim evaluations.
