A travel policyholder has lost a claim dispute after her handbag, passport and other belongings were stolen from outside her garage at the end of a family trip.

Nib Travel Services declined the woman’s theft claim, saying cover under its policy ended when the family entered the boundary of their property.

And the Australian Financial Complaints Authority has agreed, noting travel insurance is “intended to provide cover when you are away from your home, which is commonly subject to its own insurance”.

When the family arrived home by taxi, all their bags were placed at the front of the house. The policyholder went to get her key from a neighbour and her family waited at the side of the house. 

When the woman returned, her handbag was gone, with passports and other belongings inside.

The policyholder later changed her version of events to say unloading of the bags had not been completed, which should mean the family was still transiting home.

But an AFCA member has disregarded this, noting a photo showed the bags in front of the garage door, within the property’s fence line, before the loss occurred.

Related article: No proof insurance builder behind $32k theft, AFCA finds

“I am satisfied this confirms they had returned to their residential address before the loss. I prefer the contemporaneous account provided when they lodged their claim.”

The Nib policy defines home as “your usual residential address in Australia”.

The insured said Nib’s wording suggested being “in the actual residence itself” after all travel activity concluded.

But AFCA says the policy is clear and an ordinary understanding of the term would include being inside the fence line.

“I do not consider the policy is ambiguous or unduly narrow,” the ombudsman said. “Most people would think their home includes the area within their property boundary.”

AFCA has rejected the argument that it was unclear when cover ended.

“I acknowledge the complainants feel their trip was not yet complete as they had not yet brought their luggage and travel documents into the house, and the policy period had not yet expired. However, the policy clearly states when cover applies.”

See the ruling here.