A man who stopped to make a coffee at a service station at 3am and emerged to find his vehicle gone will not have his claim paid after losing a dispute with his insurer.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) ruled the man breached a policy condition by leaving a spare key in the vehicle while it was unattended, voiding the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance policy he held with Auto & General.

“The spare key was left in the vehicle. This meant the vehicle was easier to steal and the insurer is entitled to deny the claim,” the AFCA ruling says.

The car was stolen from the service station on May 19 and was recovered by police about four days later. Auto & General denied the claim, saying it was a condition of cover that all keys be removed when the vehicle was unattended.

A keyless entry and drive feature meant the key only had to be near the car, and not inserted into the ignition, to enter and start it.

The driver told police he left his phone and a spare key in the centre console, while Auto & General’s file notes showed his partner said the key had “possibly” been in the vehicle since she purchased it in late 2018.

She initially said the spare key was kept in the glove box and Auto & General informed her the presence of the key might mean the claim was denied. The complaint lodged later with AFCA stated she never confirmed the spare key was in the vehicle and she was unsure if it was in there or not.

The spare key was never located.

“On balance, I accept this second key was in the vehicle,” AFCA’s ombudsman said. “It is apparent both complainants thought it was in the vehicle. The act of leaving the second key in the vehicle … made it easier for the thief to take the vehicle as there would have been no need to bypass the ignition.”

According to the police report, the driver parked and spent about a minute making his coffee at 3.10am. The AFCA ombudsman said the car could be considered “unattended” as he was not close enough to have a “reasonable prospect of preventing any unauthorised interference”.

“He was getting himself a coffee at the time of the loss. It is apparent he was unaware of the interference with the vehicle whilst he was in the service station,” the ombudsman said.

There were no signs the insured vehicle was entered with force, with no broken lock or apparent bypass of the ignition.

“It was stolen quickly with him in the service station. The absence of damage, and the speed of the theft, indicates it was possibly left unlocked and/or could be accessed due to the presence of the spare key. The presence of the spare key means the vehicle would be easy to start,” the ruling says.

See the full ruling here.