Leonard O'Meara's modest family home sits along the main strip of Derby, a small town in Western Australia's Kimberley region.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised that the following story contains further images of a person who has died.
The three-bedroom cottage isn't worth much, riddled with asbestos and in need of some serious maintenance.
But the Indigenous pensioner, who was born in 1935, was fiercely protective of his family's main asset.
"Mum and Dad were so proud, they were probably the first Aboriginal people in town to buy their own house," his daughter Maureen O'Meara said.
"He really set the benchmark for a lot of the local people in town about what they could achieve."
In 2009, Mr O'Meara, a Jaru man, began diligently paying for home insurance.
He signed on to the ANZ Home Insurance policy during a visit to the branch of his local bank, ANZ.
The policy was underwritten by QBE Insurance and co-insured with an ANZ subsidiary until mid-2015.
After that, QBE became the sole insurer.
But before his death last year, the 88-year-old asked his daughters for help because the rising premium was unaffordable.
In 2022-2023, he paid more than $9,500.
"I was absolutely gobsmacked," Maureen O'Meara said.
"I nearly had a heart attack, I was thinking where is Dad going to get the money from?"
What Mr O'Meara was charged was more than double the average premium of $4,395 for home and contents insurance in north-west Australia in 2022-23, according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).
Derby has no recent history of cyclones and is not flood-prone, reasons commonly behind higher premiums.
"I was saying to him, 'We need to have a look at what else is on the market because they're just ripping you off Dad,'" Maureen O'Meara said.
Another daughter, Selena, noticed her father was stressed and falling into depression.
"He was also worried about, 'How am I going to manage to afford to pay these premiums, keep up with my rates? Keep up with buying food?'" she said.
All up, between 2009 and 2024, Mr O'Meara forked out $54,000 on the home insurance. The premiums almost quadrupled after 2016, despite the cover not including contents.
A recent valuation found the property, built in the 1950s, was worth no more than $175,000 and almost all of the value was for the land alone.
The insurance policy was for the total replacement value, meaning if the home was destroyed the insurer would rebuild it at the market value and to current building code, which has led his family to question its suitability.
"How do they charge an aged pensioner this amount of premiums, for a home that we don't even know the value of?" Selena O'Meara said.
The family is now battling both QBE and ANZ, arguing their father was overcharged, which pushed him into financial stress while he paid for an insurance product that was unsuitable.
Concerns pensioner was slugged with 'loyalty tax'
The family is being assisted in the dispute by Alan Gray, a financial counsellor with Bush Money Mob.
"This would be the worst insurance rip-off I've ever encountered," Mr Gray said.
Mr Gray has obtained an alternative quote with another insurer for $2,850, with the policy providing building cover for $450,000.
He questions whether QBE charged Mr O'Meara excessive premiums, known as a "loyalty tax", because he didn't possess the skills to easily shop around.
"QBE took gross advantage of his loyalty," Mr Gray said.
"The reality is that a three-bedroom asbestos cottage is not worth anything."
Last September, Alan Gray visited Mr O'Meara and recorded a short video with him.
In the footage, Mr O'Meara described how he was treated as "outrageous".
He also said his bank ANZ had insisted he take out the policy.
"I didn't have much of an idea what was going on because they stated that I had to pay that insurance," Mr O'Meara said in the video.
"Well, I didn't want to argue with it because the house was very important to me, so I paid it.
"I had nobody else to help me to sort it out for me."
It's unclear if ANZ or QBE did any suitability or affordability checks on Mr O'Meara as a vulnerable customer, despite specific provisions in the insurance code of practice.
The code states: "We are committed to taking extra care with customers who experience vulnerability", with key vulnerabilities listed as: "age; Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander status; remote location; or financial distress".
However, the code puts the onus on the customer to raise these issues.
Mr Gray has lodged a complaint with QBE calling on it to refund the payments his client made after 2016, including penalty interest, and pay compensation.
However, QBE has rejected the complaint, stating the premiums Mr O'Meara paid were calculated correctly based on increasing risk factors using "data and technology".
His home town of Derby is in an area that is prone to tropical cyclones.
Despite that, Derby has never been directly impacted by "gale force winds in the town since reliable records started in 1972/73", according to the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM).
Nor is Derby flood-prone.
"The only floods would be nuisance street flooding from heavy rain," a BOM spokesperson said.
Family says insurer 'took advantage' of pensioner
Mr O'Meara died at the age of 88 in September last year, with his dispute unresolved.
"I think they took advantage of my dad because of his age, his vulnerability, his loyalty," Maureen O'Meara said.
"They should have been looking after him.
"He was a pensioner for goodness sake, he deserved better."
QBE Insurance declined to be interviewed.
In a statement, the company rejected the claim Mr O'Meara was ripped off.
"We acknowledge Mr O'Meara's dissatisfaction with the premiums paid, however they did reflect the risks and benefits of the policy held by Mr O'Meara," a spokesperson said.
QBE said Mr O'Meara did receive the discounts he was entitled to, including an over-50s senior discount, and was not charged a loyalty tax.
The company also defended the high premiums he was charged, arguing it reflected the potential cost of rebuilding in a remote location.
"The policy was a full building replacement policy, which means if there was an insurable event, the insurers would rebuild the building to current building standards and requirements, no matter the subsequent costs.
"The rebuild would cover a rebuild of the home to contemporary building standards in line with the National Construction Code, including current cyclone standards.
"To meet current building standards required by law, the building would be substantially different and more expensive than the current structure built in 1955 and the cost of full building replacement construction is not necessarily related to the market value of property."
Calls for investigation over ANZ and QBE's conduct
Unsatisfied, the family is planning on escalating the dispute to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority.
They are also calling on the corporate watchdog ASIC to investigate.
In particular, they want an examination into whether Mr O'Meara received all the discounts he should have, if a loyalty tax was charged and if the premium increases were excessive.
ASIC said it could not comment on individual cases but said that addressing harm and misconduct impacting First Nations consumers was a priority.
The corporate regulator said it expected insurers to treat people honestly and fairly and put customers' interests before their own commercial interests.
General insurers have been forced to refund customers $815 million after ASIC found last year they had overcharged them or failed to pass on pricing discounts.
As part of this work QBE Insurance repaid more than $90 million due to conduct affecting almost 750,000 policies.
ASIC has also warned insurers about charging "loyalty taxes" to consumers who don't shop around.
"In August 2023, ASIC commenced civil penalty proceedings against Insurance Australia Limited (IAL) and Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Limited, alleging that they had misled customers about the loyalty discounts available for certain types of home insurance," ASIC said in a statement.
Mr O'Meara's family is also pursuing a complaint against ANZ.
It wants to know whether any staff members received financial rewards for signing Mr O'Meara up, and what they did to ensure the product was suitable for him.
ANZ did not respond to specific questions, saying it doesn't comment on customer cases.
"We are focused on providing clear information about our products and services – including those we distribute with our insurance partners — ensuring that any advice provided takes into account a customer's financial situation and needs, enabling them to make an informed decision about whether to acquire or hold a product," a spokesperson said in a statement.
The bank said it was not involved in setting prices for products underwritten by a third party like QBE.
Rosie Thomas, from the consumer group Choice, said she was concerned some vulnerable customers found it difficult to compare quotes and policies.
"Consumers experiencing vulnerability can face significant barriers to shopping around, which means they're more likely to be paying the insurance 'loyalty tax'," she said.
"There are various factors that can contribute to this including the complexity of insurance products and information, exclusion from online services or cognitive decline from aging."
Choice believes Australia should consider banning insurers from charging loyal customers excessive premiums.
"We think slugging people with a loyalty tax in an essential market like home insurance is just plain unfair," Ms Thomas said.
"A strong new law banning unfair business practices like this in financial services could give regulators another tool for addressing the insurance loyalty tax.
"In the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority has gone as far as banning the loyalty tax by introducing a rule that requires that insurers offer renewing customers a price that is no higher than they would pay as a new customer."
More than 1 million households struggling with home insurance costs
Mr O'Meara's experience with ballooning premiums is part of a concerning national trend.
Home insurance affordability is worsening, according to a recent Actuaries Institute report, with premium increases being driven by natural disasters as well as rising building and reinsurance costs.
About one in eight Australian households are experiencing home insurance "affordability stress", estimates Affinity Consulting principal Sharanjit Paddam, the lead author of the report.
"That's about 1.24 million households at last reckoning," he said.
That has increased fears more people will risk giving up their cover and going without insurance.
But consumers could usually reduce their premiums by shopping around, Mr Paddam said.
"It does vary substantially across the country, it depends where you are in the country, it depends how many insurers there are," he said.
As for Derby, it has the fewest number of insurers in Australia, alongside Alice Springs in the Northern Territory and Port Hedland, in Western Australia's Pilbara region.
Only five insurers offer policies for homes in the post code.
The federal government has tried to drive down prices in northern Australia by creating a cyclone reinsurance pool designed to reduce costs to the industry and cover cyclone and related flood damage.
However, the ACCC says it is yet to see this policy make a significant difference to household budgets.
The consumer watchdog has also made key recommendations that are sitting on the shelf which include:
- A national home insurance comparison website set up by the federal government so people can quickly and easily choose between policies. This already exists in the energy market
- Insurers should be required to provide specific support to customers experiencing payment difficulties
- Scrapping taxes on home insurance like stamp duties
- Ban commissions and other financial benefits paid to insurance brokers due to concerns about possible conflicts of interest