20/10/2026
Two small Queensland businesses closed during Cyclone Alfred in March 2025 and claimed the income they lost. A Gold Coast salon shut for three days because public transport stopped and the owner felt a duty to staff. A gin distillery shut on the emergency warnings.
Both claims relied on a prevention of access extension in their business interruption cover. Both were declined, and the Australian Financial Complaints Authority agreed with the insurers. The wording needed an order from a public authority, tied to damage or threat of damage near the premises. Advice to stay home was not an order, and fallen trees near the owner's house were not "in the vicinity" of the salon.
Neither owner did anything wrong. They made safe calls for their people. The lesson is about the wording: some policies respond to an order, some respond to damage nearby, and the two are not interchangeable.
The question to ask before the season is which trigger your own wording uses. We can help you find it.
Sources: Insurance News, Hairdresser's cyclone BI claim fails to make the cut, 19 August 2026; Insurance News, Gin distillery loses cyclone disruption dispute, 1 October 2026.