A couple who sought a $15,000 payout for a missing engagement ring have lost a claim dispute because they did not buy an optional benefit that would have covered the item. 

The claimants contacted insurer IAG in August 2023 to report the ring lost somewhere in their home a few months earlier.  

They had listed the ring as specified contents under their home and contents policy.  

IAG staff initially said the loss would be covered, but the insurer reversed its decision about four days later.

It said the couple did not have “portable contents” coverage. The product disclosure statement said the policy would not cover “any item which is unaccounted for, lost or misplaced other than as provided for under the contents optional extra for portable contents cover”.

IAG acknowledges the couple listed the ring as specified contents but says this does not cover accidental loss.  

The claimants argued IAG’s website misled them about the specified contents coverage.  

But in its dispute ruling, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority says the website was not misleading and it was fair for the insurer to decline the claim.

“While more information about an accidental loss of an item would have assisted the complainants, other policyholders may expect different information to be shown on the website,” AFCA said.

“The website offered several opportunities for the complainants to read the policy terms and understand the cover offered under the various policy sections.”  

AFCA says it was the complainants’ responsibility to read the policy’s terms and “assess if it met their needs and make necessary changes if they required accidental loss cover for the engagement ring”.

IAG has been told to pay the policyholders $1000 compensation for its initial indication the claim would be accepted, causing “frustration, stress and inconvenience”.

See the ruling here.