Hacked Company Loses Insurance Battle Over Customer Payment Scam

The information on this website is general in nature and does not take into account your objectives, financial situation, or needs. Consider seeking personal advice from a licensed adviser before acting on any information.

The company, holding a management liability insurance policy, sought to claim under its third-party crime coverage to recover the outstanding bills from the customers. However, AIG Australia denied the claim, stating that the policy only addressed "direct financial loss" from theft or fraud by a third party, and argued that since the stolen money belonged to customers, the business itself did not suffer a direct loss.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) reviewed the case and acknowledged the company's loss. However, it determined that the loss did not align with the policy's specific terms. The ruling emphasized that only the company's customers faced direct financial loss, whereas the company experienced an indirect one due to subsequent non-payments.

The AFCA explained that the hack did not meet the company's policy definition of theft, as the stolen funds belonged to the customers, not the business. This discrepancy meant that the policy's electronic and computer crime coverage was not applicable. Additionally, the policy's criteria for "fraudulent act," which required acts of forgery or counterfeiting the insured had acted upon, were not met since the company was unaware of the false invoices.

This case highlights the critical distinction between direct and indirect financial losses in insurance claims, emphasizing the importance of understanding policy terms. For businesses, particularly those prone to cyber threats, it underscores the significance of having insurance coverage that appropriately addresses loss scenarios stemming from such events. It also serves as a cautionary tale of the complexities involved in recovering from cybercrime attacks without adequate protection.

Moving forward, businesses should ensure robust cybersecurity measures to prevent similar email hacks, coupled with clarifying insurance policies for adequate coverage against indirect financial losses as a result of customer fraud. This scenario may lead insurance providers to reevaluate their product offerings, potentially driving the development of more comprehensive cybercrime coverages. Additionally, the financial sector might witness increased discussions on how to formulate clearer policy definitions that align with the evolving nature of cyber threats.

Published:Tuesday, 11th Mar 2025
Author: Paige Estritori

Please Note: We do not endorse any specific products or companies. Some content is sourced from third parties, including press releases, and may not be independently verified for accuracy or completeness.

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Clear

What Genetic Testing Reform Could Mean for Income Protection

16 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Federal moves to restrict the use of genetic test results in life insurance underwriting have important implications for Australians who are thinking about income protection cover. The reform is designed to reduce the fear that taking a medically useful genetic test could later make it harder, more expensive or impossible to obtain personal insurance. - read more

Why Premium Differences Matter When Choosing Income Protection

09 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent income protection cost commentary has put a practical issue back in front of Australian workers: two policies that appear similar at first glance can carry very different long-term costs. For people relying on their income to meet mortgage repayments, rent, school fees, business expenses or family commitments, the premium is important, but it should not be viewed in isolation. - read more

ASIC Claims Scrutiny Highlights What Income Protection Customers Should Check

02 Sep 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent regulatory attention on life insurance claims handling has again highlighted a practical issue for Australians who rely on income protection insurance: the value of cover is tested most clearly when a person is too unwell or injured to keep earning. While the industry has been working to improve service standards, the latest scrutiny reinforces that delays, unclear requests for information and poor communication can make an already stressful period harder for claimants. - read more

Latest APRA Figures Keep Income Protection Under the Spotlight

26 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

APRA’s latest life insurance performance data has again highlighted why income protection remains one of the most closely watched parts of the Australian insurance market. While the broader life insurance sector has continued to show signs of improved stability, disability income products remain sensitive to claims trends, pricing assumptions and the length of time people stay off work after illness or injury. - read more

Life Code Findings Put Income Protection Claims Back Under the Microscope

12 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

The latest industry attention on Life Insurance Code compliance is another reminder that income protection insurance is not just about having a policy in place. For working Australians, the real test comes when illness or injury interrupts earnings and a claim needs to move from paperwork to practical financial support. - read more

Claims Handling Scrutiny Offers Income Protection Lessons

05 Aug 2026: Paige Estritori

Recent industry attention on insurance claims handling has put a practical issue back in front of Australian households: a policy is only as valuable as the support it provides when a claim is made. For income protection insurance, that moment often arrives during illness, injury, stress and reduced cash flow, so clear communication and timely assessment matter enormously. - read more

Click for more Insurance News