Loss of insurance for low-balance accounts could cause legal headaches

5 June 2019
| By Hannah |
image
image
expand image

Superannuation funds could face legal difficulty once group insurance for inactive accounts is switched off on 1 July, as the Protecting Your Super reforms come into effect, as members who were unaware they were losing their cover may seek compensation should they need its protection.

TAL’s general manager, group life product and pricing, investments and retirement incomes, Darren Wickham, labelled the problem as a “sleeper issue” with the legislation at an Actuaries Institute media lunch yesterday, warning that members may seek legal remedies if they ended up needing group life insurance cover.

He anticipated there could be as many as 4,000 – 5,000 claims made by such members in the next 12 months, and said that the issue of whether the Government, the super fund or the individual should pay in these situations hadn’t been thought out.

This tied in with a broader concern in the insurance and superannuation industries that many members who didn’t want to lose their group cover could end up doing so under the reforms. While superannuation funds were contacting people who would be without cover from 1 July, problems such as address changes or members simply not reading fund communications meant some might not realise.

Wickham noted that of the four million inactive account members so far notified by funds regarding their cover, a large portion of 10 to 15 per cent had opted to continue receiving the insurance.

While he believed that the reforms were, overall, a positive development, as “people don’t need insurance eroding their [super] balances”, there were issues such as this that could prove problematic in their rollout.

At the same lunch, Wickham said that a rise in mental health claims was another key issue insurers were facing, with total and permanent disability (TPD) benefits claims substantially growing at a faster rate than the prevalence of mental illness.

Claims for lump sum payments in these situations caused problems because of the difficulty of determining whether mental illnesses were permanent, and as their rise could then drive premiums up.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Submitted by devil's advocate on Thu, 06/06/2019 - 14:14

It isn't the superannuation funds' trustees who should subject to any back lash for members' loss of insurance entitlements; this farce has been created by ill advised legislation. Account holders should also be responsible for their own actions and not wait until it is too late. It has already been an expensive exercise. The situation is only going to get worse.

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Recommended for you

sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

3 months 3 weeks ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

4 months ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

4 months ago

Michael Lovett, who left the investment firm just three months after launching its Vanguard Super offering, has taken up a chief executive role at an Australian asset man...

20 hours 41 minutes ago

As Australia gears up for the May budget, Treasurer Jim Chalmers has shed light on the significant global economic challenges that are shaping the nation’s fiscal decisio...

21 hours ago

A fintech leader has said that AI technologies will have profound implications for the superannuation sector....

21 hours ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND