A man who claimed against a legal liability cover after his dog attacked a neighbour has lost his bid to overturn his insurer’s denial decision.

The neighbour said the dog entered her yard through a shared fence and killed some of her chickens in April last year. She said the dog then left, before returning and biting her as she tried to protect the remaining chickens, her own dog and some guinea pigs.

She sought damages for her injury and supported her account of the incident with a local council report. 

Suncorp declined the dog owner’s claim because the legal liability section of the home policy only covered incidents on the insured property.

The man said the incident happened due to a fence defect on the neighbour’s side and argued he should be covered because the attack would not have happened if not for that fault.

He also speculated that the incident may have happened on his property, because blood was found on his patio. He said the neighbour’s lawyer noted that the woman shot a video from inside his property after being bitten, but this was not mentioned in her statement.

The claimant said the inconsistency “raises questions” as to why she would enter his property after suffering an unprovoked attack from the dog.

In a dispute decision, an Australian Financial Complaints Authority ombudsman says the evidence provided shows “the dog went into the neighbour’s yard due to the chickens ... and bit the neighbour while in their yard.

“The neighbour’s statement, including the statutory declaration, is supported by the council report. There is insufficient information to dispute her version of events. While I acknowledge the complainant’s concerns regarding the neighbour’s statements and his submissions regarding the condition of the fence, I do not consider these submissions change the outcome.

“The policy is clear and unambiguous regarding when the insurer will cover a legal liability claim. I am satisfied the policy does not respond in the circumstances.”

Click here for the ruling.