A motorist who claimed for the alleged theft of a car he bought from a private seller will not be covered after he could not show he owned the vehicle.

The man said he arranged for a car transport service to bring the 2015 Lexus SUV from Queensland to Victoria after buying it in January last year, and arranged insurance for the vehicle on the same day. 

But he said the transport depot never received the car.

He said the seller had asked him to pay to have the registration transferred to his name, but after contacting Lexus’ Brisbane office, he found the vehicle was still in the seller’s name. 

Insurance Manufacturers of Australia refused to cover the loss, saying there was no persuasive evidence the car had been stolen from the man, because he had not owned it. 

The claimant provided a copy of an undated, unsigned contract of sale, which he said showed he would pay $26,000, including a $7500 deposit prior to inspection.

Screenshots showed the insured made four separate payments to the seller between December 28 and January 3, totalling $25,500. He said this indicated he owned the vehicle.

The man also provided a police report, dated the day after the alleged theft, which referred to obtaining property by deception but made no reference to the vehicle or circumstances of the loss.

The insurer said obtaining property by deception was not classified as theft, and the report showed police were not treating the case as theft. 

In a dispute ruling, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority says that for loss to be covered, the complainant would have to provide proof of ownership. 

There is no record of the agreement with the seller or any information from the transport service to show the car was booked for transfer, it says. 

“Considering the limited information provided, I am not persuaded the complainant has shown the vehicle was stolen from him,” an authority ombudsman said.

Click here for the ruling.