A company car will not be covered after the business’ director was found to have parked it near his rural home unlocked, unattended and with the key inside.

The company informed Suncorp of the theft in January last year, but the insurer flagged the director’s conflicting accounts of what happened.

He initially explained that he parked the Toyota LandCruiser – insured for $110,500 – outside his property, walked about 20 metres to a farm gate and turned around to find the vehicle missing.

A police report stated the car was “left unlocked with the keys inside”.

In a follow-up interview with the insurer’s investigator, the man said he was 100 metres away from the car for at least 15 minutes while tending to a fire he had lit.

He said he put the key in a lunchbox under the car, and he realised the vehicle was gone when he was speaking to police and firefighters who arrived to tell him he needed a fire permit.

The insurer spoke to the attending police officer, who said the director reported the vehicle was unlocked with the key inside and made no mention of it being in a lunchbox.

He told police he had a “relatively clear view” of the car while working at the front of the farm, and he suspected it was stolen when he briefly entered a nearby building.

Suncorp said the police report was the most credible version of events. The information was provided shortly after the theft and aligned with what the man said was his “usual practice” at that location.

It said the man failed in his responsibility to prevent loss or damage.

In a dispute ruling, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority accepts the police report was “most likely to be correct” and it was reasonable to deny the claim.

It was “inherently unlikely” that, within an hour of reporting the loss to the police, the man “was so confused he mistakenly said the key was in the vehicle when it was in the lunchbox under it”.

See the ruling here.