A motor policyholder has lost a claim dispute after saying she had left a key in her stolen car, before changing her story when told an exclusion would apply.

The complainant parked her Lexus IS350 in her driveway about 3am and discovered it was missing the next morning.

She lodged a claim with Auto & General and admitted the car may have been left unlocked with its key inside.

She noted one of her two keys was missing and said she had “left her keys in the car before, and she forgets things all the time”.

When the insurer’s agent flagged exclusions around leaving a car unattended without proper security measures, the woman said she would speak with her husband.

The couple later explained the key had been attached to their house keys, which they needed to get into their home. It was suggested the husband may have dropped them nearby or left them in the house door.

More from AFCA: Tour guide’s helicopter claim crashes despite cost saving

The insurer denied the claim because its policy required the person responsible for the vehicle to keep all keys “safe and secure, if the car is left unattended for any period of time”.

The complainant argued her initial statement – given in writing and verified by phone – was made “in panic” after the theft.

She said she was unsure what happened to the key, but the car had a keyless entry system and could have been stolen without the thieves accessing it.

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority is unconvinced by the couple’s revised version of events, noting the policyholder said she was unsure about the key only after being made aware of the policy’s conditions. She sounded “composed during the call” and gave details consistent with what was in a police report.

“I am more inclined to accept the complainant’s initial version of events, where she indicated it was most likely she left the keys in the vehicle,” an AFCA ombudsman said. “In either circumstance, the complainant has breached the policy conditions by leaving the vehicle unsecure while it was unattended.”

The stolen car was later recovered but found to be damaged. The woman said it had since broken down, but the insurer said this was not due to an insured event.

AFCA says damage from the theft is not covered, but the woman can lodge a new claim if there are issues unrelated to the crime.

See the ruling here.