A WOMAN whose car was stolen from Mount Cotton says her insurer’s poor handling of claims makes customers vulnerable.
Susan Howbrigg said Coles Insurance at first decided not to cover the replacement of her 10-year-old Ford Escape, which was stolen from her sister’s Mount Cotton Road acreage property last month after thieves used another vehicle to ram open the property’s gates.
Coles Insurance later overturned the decision as part of their “standard internal dispute resolution process”, after they were contacted by Redland City Bulletin for a response.
- Read more: Insurers questioned over disaster claims
- Read more: Cyclone Debbie insurance claim 'shambles'
- Read more: Banks inquiry turns to general insurance
A Coles Insurance spokesperson said the claim was originally declined due to exclusions in Coles’ motor policy, which stated car thefts were not covered if the car was left unlocked, or with its keys in the vehicle, or if alarms or an immobiliser were not activated.
“We have apologised to our customer and informed her that the claim will now be covered and she was offered a hire car for the interim period,” the spokesperson said.
Ms Howbrigg said her car was parked 20-metres inside the property’s fencing, with its keys in the ignition, when it was stolen about 3pm on Saturday, August 25.
A white Toyota Prado was rammed into a gate before a man jumped out and into Ms Howbrigg’s car, she said.
Ms Howbrigg, who was gardening nearby, ran over and lunged for the car but fell as it was jolted forward.
She said she was surprised her claim to have the theft covered was originally rejected by Coles Insurance.
She said the insurers told her they based their decision on an initial report filed by police, stating the vehicle was left unlocked with its keys in the ignition, unsecured and parked on a driveway, thereby fitting grounds for coverage exclusions.
Ms Howbrigg disagreed, saying her car was parked inside a fenced property and with her nearby.
Despite numerous calls to the claims department to provide the extra information, she was never connected, with her number later blocked, she said.
“I don’t understand how the insurance company can say the car was unsecured,” Ms Howbrigg said.
“It was 20 metres inside a fenced property and stolen is stolen.”
The spokesperson said extra information later supplied by police supported Ms Howbrigg’s claim.
Ms Howbrigg said she would be on the lookout for another insurer because of the rigmarole.
“I expect more,” she said.
“It’s why you get your car insured and its why you need protection.”
