Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to raise an extraordinary case, which is causing a degree of distress for a constituent in my electorate, regarding the insurance sector. As the member for Gippsland, I've unfortunately experienced many natural disasters and have dealt with the insurance industry on a range of issues, and it's almost always been a very positive experience. But the case I'm about to describe is troubling, as it is causing a degree of distress in my electorate.

In April, my constituent's Nissan Patrol was stolen from her home and severely damaged. The events leading up to the theft are important. I'm advised that the car outside the premises, a Holden Colorado, was broken into, and the thieves accessed the family's garage fob pass, which was then used to enter the garage and steal the family's Nissan Patrol—so there were two vehicles involved. By accessing the Patrol in the locked garage, the thieves were then able to make off with the vehicle, because the vehicle's keys were inside it. What concerns me is that the constituent's claim for insurance has been rejected by Auto & General, operating under the name Budget Direct. They've rejected the claim because, in their words, the vehicle was unattended and the keys were inside the vehicle. Really this is a community service announcement, in that it's something people should be aware of. Even though your vehicle is in a locked garage, if the keys are inside that vehicle your insurance company may not honour the claim if your vehicle is stolen and damaged.

The justification by Auto & General—Budget Direct—was: 'The decision to decline the claim has been maintained due to your keys being left in your car when it was stolen.' In the review process initiated by my constituent, the company went on to say: 'We understand having your car stolen is stressful, and we don't feel it's fair to decline cover in this circumstance; however, leaving the keys in the car while unattended for any period of time breaches the policy conditions, and therefore we cannot cover this claim for theft of the car.'

The problem with the term 'unattended', Madam Deputy Speaker, is that the car was in the family garage. The family were at home asleep. They were the victims of aggravated burglary, and, to make things worse, their car was taken away and damaged significantly while they were asleep, and somehow this is meant to be the owner's fault.

At the base of the review the company goes on to say: 'We acknowledge the vehicle was in a locked garage at the time of the theft, adding a level of security. The location of the vehicle at the time of theft does not contribute to or invalidate the policy requirements regarding the key location. It is our position that the act of leaving the keys within the vehicle has significantly contributed to the theft of your vehicle.' Again, as a community service announcement, I must say to my constituents: please read the fine print. I also must say to Budget Direct: there is some doubt here, and please consider giving the benefit of the doubt to my constituents, who have suffered a very significant loss. On top of the stress of being violated and having their home robbed, they now feel like they're victims again because their insurance company is refusing to honour their claim, and quite a significant claim, for the damage to the vehicle.