Home insurers are failing to meet industry code obligations on renewal notices, and in some cases quoting existing customers more than a new policyholder would pay for identical cover on the same property, according to a new report.
The findings come from Signal Failures: What are insurers telling us with their pricing, published on September 29 by CHOICE and the Financial Rights Legal Centre (FRLC). The report draws on an analysis of 52 home insurance renewal notices submitted by policyholders across Australia. The sample is small and self-selected, but the pattern it describes is consistent with findings from regulators.
Clause 50 of the General Insurance Code of Practice, published by the Insurance Council of Australia (ICA), applies to home building, home contents and motor vehicle policies sold directly by insurers. For those products, insurers must include in the renewal notice a comparison between this year's and last year's premium, and explain how the premium is calculated.
The clause applies to policies sold direct. Renewals arranged through brokers fall outside it, and in those cases it is the broker who typically presents and explains the renewal terms to the client.
CHOICE and FRLC argue the clause requires more than a line of generic text, and that the notices they reviewed did not meet even the basic threshold.
Not one notice provided what the organisations considered an adequate explanation for the premium increase. Three in four gave no explanation at all. The remaining quarter offered generic language that made no reference to the specific property or the policyholder's circumstances. None explained how policyholders could reduce their risk or lower their premium. Close to 10% made no reference to the prior year's premium at all, and 92% did not include it on the first page.
The average increase across the sample was 16%, with a significant number between 25% and 50%, and some reaching 100%.
A companion CHOICE survey of 831 home insurance policyholders found 71% did not understand why their premium had risen, and 73% considered the increase unfair.
Read next: The definitions behind home insurance denials are broken – and still unfixed
The report's sharpest case involves a policyholder named Rachel, whose property sits in a one-in-100-year flood zone.
Her renewal notice arrived for $8,576. When she ran a new business quote for the same address, cover level, excess and risk profile, the figure came back approximately $500 lower. The customer service representative she spoke to could not account for the difference.
Rachel had already tried shopping the market, only to find other insurers declined to quote for the property at all. "I feel I am trapped by this insurer, and that they can charge me whatever they want, knowing that no-one else will insure me," she said.
That combination of a client with no alternatives, a premium she cannot verify and a renewal notice that explains nothing is where a broker's access to markets and ability to interpret risk can make a concrete difference.
CHOICE also examined its home insurance reviews database, identifying 20 addresses where quotes from different insurers were especially wide-ranging.
In McGrath's Hill, NSW, the lowest quote for one address was $1,940 and the highest $36,650, a ratio of close to 20 to one. In Penrith, Sydney, quotes for the same property ranged from $47,117 to $108,238. In Garbutt, near Townsville, they ran from $2,591 to $33,103.
Spreads of that scale point to insurers applying very different assumptions to the same risk. Testing the market, and understanding which insurers' appetite best fits a client's actual exposure, is where brokers add value at renewal.
The findings echo the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) August 2026 review of motor insurance renewal notices, Report 838, which found that no insurer reviewed had explained the factors behind premium changes in its quote or renewal documents. ASIC commissioner Alan Kirkland said: "Consumers should not have to guess why premiums have changed."
ASIC also has Federal Court proceedings under way against a Queensland insurer over allegations that it sent more than 570,000 renewal documents containing misleading premium comparison information over more than five years, according to an ASIC media release issued in September 2025.
The General Insurance Code Governance Committee (GICGC) recorded 70,325 code breaches in 2024-25, up 20.5% on the prior year, with claims-related failures accounting for 59% of the total.
Read next: Fragmented home claims training standards put broker relationships on the line
According to the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's (APRA) March 2026 Insurance Climate Vulnerability Assessment, home insurance premiums rose at an annual average of 7.2% between 2010 and 2025, against wage growth of 3.1%.
A CHOICE survey from March 2026 found only 17% of respondents trust their insurance provider, the lowest reading in 11 years.
"Insurers know more about the risks facing our homes than anyone else, yet consumers are routinely given a premium increase without any meaningful explanation of what's driving it," said Julia Davis, principal of external relations and advocacy at FRLC.
CHOICE and FRLC are calling on the federal government to amend insurance legislation to require specific disclosure of what is driving premium changes, and to give policyholders information they can act on to reduce their costs.
"We are not calling for exhaustive explanations, rather the provision of enough information for a consumer to understand the factors that led to the price they are paying and how these factors may have changed at renewal," Davis said.
