Lloyd’s must settle with a jewellery shop after a customer stole gold chains worth $500,000 when a sales assistant left the room, the industry ombudsman has ruled.

The insurer, denying the store’s theft claim, said its policy required all valuables to be kept in locked showcases, drawers and counters, and if items were removed to show a customer, they must not be left unattended.

But the jeweller’s broker argued other employees were within arm’s reach of the stolen jewellery, so the items were under supervision “and not truly abandoned or unsecured”.

The theft in November 2024 was captured on CCTV, which showed 17 customers in the store – including a woman and her son – and four sales staff.

The son tried on several gold chains from a jewellery roll. When he selected a chain, the assistant took it to another room to be resized, leaving the roll on the counter. Another assistant stood about a metre away. 

The mother leant on the counter, resting her arm on the roll. As the nearby assistant moved away, the woman slid the roll towards her, then put her bag and jacket over it.

Only two staff members were in the room, serving other people, when the woman picked up her jacket with the roll concealed underneath. The assistant who had served her returned after three minutes, and they discussed other jewellery items.

The two thieves paid for their chain and left through two security doors. About 15 minutes later, the jeweller discovered the roll was missing.  

As well as arguing the roll was not unattended, the broker said that in a retail store it was impractical to have uninterrupted physical contact with every item. Customer-induced distraction was a normal occupational risk.

An Australian Financial Complaints Authority panel says although the assistant could have better secured the roll, other staff were able to keep the jewellery under observation and had a reasonable prospect of preventing unauthorised interference with it. The roll was, therefore, “attended”.

Read the ruling here.