Five months since the disaster struck, angry NRMA customers have come forward, claiming their flood-ravaged properties have been undervalued and in some cases, builders contracted by the insurance company have refused to repair their homes.

In other cases, contractors have only agreed to repair some of the damage.

Stephen Croxon, who lives with his wife Maree and two children on Bingar Street, was offered a mere $80,000 by NRMA to fix his home which was inundated by a one-metre high wall of water in March.

But an independent assessment revealed the house would cost at least $144,000 to repair, to which NRMA retaliated with an offer of $115,000.

The company hired by NRMA to complete the work, Dak-Wal Constructions, also refused to provide a warranty for any work completed, which Mr Croxon said goes against NRMA policy.

"They said it was because there was pre-existing damage, but how are they to know what was pre-existing and what was caused by the flood?" Mr Croxon said.

"We shouldn't have to barter with them, it just doesn't make sense what's the point of having insurance if they're not going to fix your house?"

Mr Croxon's neighbour, Jason Dole, was also insured with NRMA but was only offered half of what it would cost to fix his home.

Mr Dole elected to have his own builder complete the work but was told by NRMA that the company would only cover what it deemed necessary which did not include everything damaged by the flood.

"I had to stop my builder from doing what needed to be done because NRMA wouldn't pay for it," Mr Dole said.

"Now I have to pay to fix my house out of the money I got from my contents insurance.

"I had 40-year-old bathroom tiles lift off floor that had never moved before the flood, but they said it could have happened because it was a wet area and they wouldn't pay for them."

Henry Street resident Ray Garofalo said NRMA had refused to repair his family home because of pre-existing damage but the payout offered, combined with the value of the land, would not be enough to buy a new home.

"My mum was going to buy a new car but now she can't," Mr Garofalo said.

"She has to hold onto that money because she doesn't know how much the house is going to cost her."

All three families said they had lived "perfectly happily" in their homes before the floods, despite the alleged pre-existing damage, but now they were forced to put their lives on hold because they did not know whether their homes would be repaired.

NRMA Insurance spokeswoman Adele Buhagiar said the circumstances of each claim were unique.

"However, it is a requirement of our home policies that a home must be maintained in good repair and condition," Ms Buhagiar said.

"In some cases, a home may have damage that was not the result of flooding and as such, we are only able to cover the damage caused directly by the flooding.

"Independent engineering reports are used to determine the cause of this damage."

She said customers who wished to dispute the decision regarding their claim could request a thorough review by the NRMA disputes resolution team and the Financial Ombudsman Service.