No payout U-turn for motorbike theft victim
A policyholder whose motorbike was stolen by a “buyer” on a test ride will not receive a theft payout because he gave the crook permission to use the vehicle.
The owner said the thief – who he met through Facebook Marketplace – presented as a serious buyer and left him with a wallet containing a $500 deposit while taking the bike for a ride.
Insurer QBE declined the claim on the grounds the owner let the thief take the vehicle, handing over the keys and a helmet.
It pointed to an exclusion for “theft by someone the complainant gave permission to use the motorcycle”.
The owner argued the exclusion was “clearly intended for cases where a friend or known person is loaned the motorcycle and they refuse to return it”.
But in a dispute ruling, an Australian Financial Complaints Authority ombudsman said: “If the exclusion was intended only to apply when the complainant allowed someone known to him to use the motorcycle, I consider the wording used would reflect this.
| More from AFCA: Vulnerable claimant wins payout after storm damage dispute |
“Instead, the exclusion is expressed to apply when the complainant gives ‘someone’ permission to use the motorcycle. This is not limited to people known to the complainant.
“I acknowledge the complainant says he only consented to the test ride, not continued use or theft of the motorcycle. He says he was the victim of deception and did not give true consent.
“The exclusion is directed at circumstances where a motorcycle is stolen when permission to use it was given. It does not rely on the complainant consenting to the theft.”
AFCA also considered the claimant’s reference to section 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act, which limits the use of claim denials around acts that do not contribute to losses.
But it says the owner’s decision to let the thief use the bike “could reasonably be regarded as being capable of contributing to the theft ... because there is nothing to indicate the theft would have occurred if the complainant had not allowed the thief to leave unaccompanied with the motorcycle.
“I acknowledge allowing a test ride ... may be common practice in private sales. However, this does not mean the insurer is obliged to provide insurance cover for this situation.”
See the ruling here.