Published 08 Jun 2015
Our client was Mr J of Bankstown, who was a retail professional for almost twenty years and ceased employment after a injury to his back obtained at work. Our client had with the help of another law firm pursued a worker compensation vase and afterwards under their advice decided to make a claim on his TPD insurance as paid for by his superannuation savings. The insurer denied the claim after a period of two years, during which he was subjected to continuous investigations and examinations.
At the advice of his previous lawyers he commenced a complaint with the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) to review the denial. Conciliation took place after an additional 6 months of waiting which unfortunately failed. Mr J was looking at an additional 12 months or more before a review may be scheduled before the Tribunal. He was at the end of his wits and thus sought a second opinion with Gerard Malouf and Partners.
After the free initial consultation he asked our firm to pursue his claim and we sprang immediately into action. We made demands for full payment within a month and should they not comply for the matter to be transferred immediately to the Supreme Court. The insurance company quickly responded that in review they would be willing to offer our client a large percentage of his insurance benefit so that it would be unnecessary for them to be summoned to the Supreme Court. Our client agreed to settle the matter and was able to receive a large percentage of his benefit after 4 months of retaining his new superannuation lawyers.
TPD insurers often recommend in letters for disputes to be heard at the SCT. They employ this tactic as the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal has longer waiting times and has no power to order the defendant to pay your interest and legal expenses. While this option is available, you are also entitled to exercise your right to sue for your insurance benefit at the Equity Division of the Supreme Court.
Phone Gerard Malouf and Partners on 1800 004 878 if you have a similar superannuation dispute case.