Insurers Ordered to Compensate Despite Theft Claim Doubts

10

The policyholder filed a claim two days after her vehicle was reported stolen on March 23, 2022. She recounted purchasing the car from a friend, who is a certified motor mechanic, and leaving it at their house for servicing.

Insurance Manufacturers of Australia had raised numerous concerns about the circumstances surrounding the theft. These included a lack of proof of purchase and incomplete information about the vehicle's service history. The car was insured despite the new owner not driving it, which also raised suspicions. In addition, the friend did not cooperate with the insurer’s inquiries.

AFCA responded by stating that it is common for individuals to not have a purchase receipt when buying a vehicle privately. They accepted the bank statements showing a $35,000 transaction labeled "AA-Van" as adequate evidence of payment. They also acknowledged that service history details may have been in the vehicle at the time of theft.

The ruling emphasized that purchasing insurance was logical as it included coverage for non-driving events such as theft. While cooperation from the mechanic friend would have aided the investigation, it was not deemed a sufficient reason to reject the claim.

Concerns were also raised by the insurer about why the car remained with the friend for over nine months and inconsistencies in the car’s documented compliance and build dates. AFCA found no definitive reason for the extended storage but accepted explanations, such as Melbourne's lockdown and the complainant’s husband's health issues, as plausible.

The authority acknowledged a confusing situation regarding date inconsistencies but noted that the vehicle identification number (VIN) was consistent across documentation, thus confirming ownership and associated loss.

“Although it seems unlikely that a certified motor vehicle tester would make an error in the build date, it’s not an implausible mistake to make,” commented AFCA’s adjudicator.

Given all evidence, AFCA concluded that the complainant should be recognized as the owner who suffered a financial loss, and they instructed Insurance Manufacturers of Australia to accept the claim and process the payout.

For more details on the original case and ruling, refer to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority’s documentation.

Published:Monday, 29th Jul 2024
Source: Paige Estritori

Share this news item:

Insurance News

Australian Insurers' $6.1 Billion Profit Sparks Affordability Concerns 26 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori In 2024, Australia's insurance industry reported an after-tax profit of $6.1 billion, a significant increase from the five-year average of $2 billion. This surge in profitability is attributed to substantial premium hikes and a year with fewer severe weather events. - read more

Rising Insurance Premiums Prompt Calls for Industry Reform 26 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori Recent data indicates a significant rise in insurance premiums across Australia, with home insurance premiums increasing by 16% on average over the past year. Some insurers, such as Kogan, RAC, and Honey, have raised rates by over 30%, leading to growing concerns about affordability for consumers. - read more

Rising Insurance Premiums in Northern Australia Challenge Reinsurance Efforts 26 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori Homeowners in Northern Australia are facing increasing insurance premiums, despite the federal government's implementation of a cyclone reinsurance pool in 2022, designed to lower costs in high-risk areas. - read more

Australian Insurance Premiums Set to Soar Amid Rising Demand 26 Jan 2026: Paige Estritori The Australian general insurance industry is on a trajectory of significant growth, with direct written premiums projected to surpass $144 billion by 2029. This forecast reflects a compound annual growth rate of approximately 4.7% from the $94.7 billion recorded in the previous year. - read more