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

NSW Strata Commission Ban: A Catalyst for Industry Reform 07 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori The New South Wales (NSW) government's proposal to ban commissions on strata insurance has ignited a contentious debate between consumer advocacy groups and industry leaders. This reform aims to eliminate potential conflicts of interest and enhance transparency within the strata management sector. - read more

Queensland Strata Owners Advised to Leverage New Premium Reduction Programs 07 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori Strata property owners in North and Central Queensland are being encouraged to take advantage of newly introduced federal and state initiatives designed to reduce insurance premiums and enhance cyclone resilience. These programs offer financial incentives for property upgrades that can lead to significant savings on insurance costs. - read more

Australian Insurers Struggle to Keep Pace with Emerging Risks 07 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori Recent findings from the PwC Insurance Banana Skins Survey reveal that Australian insurers are trailing their global counterparts in risk preparedness. The survey, which gathered insights from 698 insurance executives across 42 territories, indicates that Australian insurers scored 6.6% lower on the Preparedness Index compared to the global average. This gap is particularly concerning as the industry faces escalating challenges from cyber threats and the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI). - read more

Significant Increases in Australian Home Insurance Premiums 07 Feb 2026: Paige Estritori Australian homeowners are experiencing substantial increases in home insurance premiums, with the average premium rising by 16% over the past year. Consumer advocacy group Choice reports that some insurers, including Kogan, RAC, and Honey, have raised their rates by more than 30%. These hikes are attributed to various factors, including high supply chain inflation, increased claims costs, and higher reinsurance expenses due to severe weather events. - read more