A theft victim has been denied a payout after a removalist stole her car, a boat and other items, because the losses fell under a consent exclusion in her insurance policy.

The woman engaged a contractor to help her move house by transporting two vehicles, a trailer and the boat – all of which were packed with contents – to another state.

She left other items for the contractor to collect from a shed at her former property.  

The claimant said the contractor stole a vehicle, the trailer and boat, a kayak and several items. The car and trailer were later returned to her in a damaged state.  

Insurance Manufacturers of Australia rejected the woman’s claim, saying its policy excluded thefts by someone who had the insured’s consent to enter their property.  

And in a dispute ruling, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority backs the insurer’s position.  

It agrees the contractor collected the items and says the policy terms clearly note “loss or damage to contents is excluded if the theft was performed by someone entering the site or home with the complainant’s consent”.  

AFCA acknowledges the complainant’s argument that the contractor did not have consent to steal the items, but says: “Assuming that [the contractor] collecting the goods was ‘theft’, the policy operates to exclude loss where entry to the property is authorised. The policy does not require the insurer to prove that [they] acted contrary to its conditions of consent.”

The authority notes the policy includes a benefit for losses when moving home but the complainant has not flagged this.

It says the insurer should consider whether this applies to the loss if requested by the claimant.  

See the ruling here.