A company will not be covered for crash damage to a Lamborghini sports car after its insurer argued it did not disclose the driver’s regular vehicle usage due to his history of traffic offences. 

The driver, a principal director referred to as CC, reversed the Lamborghini Huracan 580-2 into a wall on October 17 2021. But the car was insured under a HDI Global Specialty SE comprehensive policy that listed another director, referred to as CF, as the only nominated driver.   

The policy dictated that anyone who drives or is expected to drive the vehicle for more than 2% of the time must be declared a nominated driver.   

HDI declined the claim on the basis that CC had probably driven the vehicle regularly and should have been listed as a nominated driver. It noted the vehicle was usually stored at CC’s home, was registered in his last name, and had personalised plates in his name.   

CC’s driving record included seven traffic offences within five years, plus licence suspensions and a conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol.   

HDI said if he was listed as a nominated driver, it would not have offered the policy, because his driving record breached its underwriting guidelines.    

The claimant said CC had driven the vehicle – worth more than $300,000 new – only once and that when the policy was incepted, there was no reason to believe he would use it regularly.   

It argued his vehicle use was irrelevant to whether it should have nominated him as a driver.   

In a dispute ruling, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority has dismissed the insured’s argument, saying relevant circumstantial evidence showed CC used the vehicle regularly.    

“I do not accept the complainant’s submissions that CC only used the vehicle once, being on the date of the collision,” it said. “This does not reconcile why the vehicle appeared to have personalised plates in his name or why the vehicle was kept at his home. At policy inception, I accept the complainant knew (or a reasonable person in the circumstances could be expected to know), that CC used the vehicle more than 2% of the time.”   

It says HDI has shown “the complainant erroneously elected to include only CF as the sole nominated driver on the policy. It chose not to ‘disclose’ CC as a nominated driver.”   

Click here for the ruling.