27/07/2026
When I am asked to provide a quote for insurance purpose, this is how I respond.
Our Policy Regarding Insurance Quotation Requests
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your enquiry.
After many years of working within the fencing and gate industry, All Fence Ltd has made the decision that we no longer provide quotations for insurance claims.
This policy is based on our experience with the insurance claims process and reflects our own views on how that process has evolved. It is not directed at any particular insurance company.
We believe the current insurance quotation system is fundamentally flawed and unfair to both customers and contractors.
Insurance companies are outsourcing their assessment role
Insurance companies collect premiums to assess and manage claims on behalf of their customers. In our opinion, the assessment of damage and the determination of repair specifications are responsibilities that should be carried out by qualified insurance assessors.
Instead, these responsibilities are frequently transferred to contractors, who are expected to inspect the damage, determine the repair methodology, prepare a detailed specification, calculate costs, and submit a comprehensive quotation—without payment.
In effect, contractors are being asked to perform the work of insurance assessors free of charge.
Customers are doing work they have already paid the insurer to perform
Policyholders often find themselves coordinating several site visits, explaining the damage multiple times, obtaining quotations, comparing contractors, and forwarding documentation to their insurer.
We do not believe this is the service customers are paying for.
When someone purchases insurance, they are purchasing professional claims management as much as financial protection. The insurer should take responsibility for assessing the damage, preparing the repair scope, appointing suitable contractors, and managing the process from beginning to end.
The current system wastes an enormous amount of professional time
It is common practice for insurers to request quotations from three or more contractors for the same project.
Each contractor invests time travelling to site, inspecting the damage, measuring, designing a repair solution, costing materials and labour, and preparing a quotation.
Only one contractor can be awarded the work.
The time and expertise invested by the remaining contractors is simply lost.
In some cases, the insurance claim is subsequently declined, meaning every contractor involved has donated their professional services for no outcome whatsoever.
We believe this is an inefficient use of industry resources and one that ultimately increases costs across the construction industry.
Lowest price does not necessarily represent best value
Where an insurer has not inspected the damage personally or met the contractors involved, meaningful comparisons between quotations become extremely difficult.
Fence and gate construction is not a commodity.
Products vary considerably in material quality, structural design, fabrication standards, corrosion protection, engineering requirements, hardware selection, automation compatibility, and expected service life.
Without technical knowledge, there is no assurance that competing quotations are based on equivalent products or construction methods.
A lower quotation may simply reflect lower-quality materials, reduced workmanship, or omissions from the repair scope.
Price alone should never be used as a substitute for technical assessment.
Customers are rarely in a position to evaluate competing quotations
Most customers have little or no experience in fence or gate construction, engineering, or fabrication.
They should not be expected to determine whether competing quotations are technically equivalent or whether a proposed repair is appropriate.
That responsibility should rest with the insurer acting through qualified assessors.
Our view
When a customer lodges an insurance claim, the insurance company becomes responsible for representing that customer's interests throughout the claims process.
We believe customers should not be required to coordinate contractors, obtain multiple quotations, or make technical comparisons that they are not qualified to make.
Likewise, contractors should not be expected to carry out unpaid assessment work on behalf of insurance companies.
As an example of our own expectations as policyholders, I have personally advised my insurer on several occasions that I pay them thousands of dollars each year to represent my interests. Following an accident, I declined to return to the scene to take photographs because I considered that to be their responsibility, not mine. On each occasion, they accepted that responsibility and arranged the necessary assessment without requiring my involvement.
This demonstrates that insurers can manage claims directly when they choose to do so.
Until the insurance industry returns to a model where insurers assess claims themselves and engage contractors to undertake the repair work—not the assessment work—All Fence Ltd will respectfully decline requests to provide quotations for insurance claims.
We appreciate your understanding and wish you every success with your claim.
Yours faithfully,
All Fence Ltd
