I think that Douglas Mcleod does not live in the real world with his letter (9 September, Insurance Times).
I would agree with Roy Rodger wholeheartedly (and I didn't always …
No coverI think that Douglas Mcleod does not live in the real world with his letter (9 September, Insurance Times).I would agree with Roy Rodger wholeheartedly (and I didn't always when we worked as colleagues in the same company) and I am aware that in the past so did the insurance ombudsman as well. Clearly a change at the top there has brought a change or softening of attitude.What do people think insurance is for? It is to provide cover against certain specified risks and be subject to certain conditions and exclusions including a keys clause. Yes, if you leave your keys in the car while it is unattended and it is stolen then there is no cover. End of story. The exclusion is there and has been to my knowledge at least a common exclusion for a good many years. This was simply because far to many so called "trifling mistakes" were arising.To relate this to a third party injury claim is quite ridiculous and yes the policy indemnifies against many things as specified in your policy but not for theft following keys being left in your car.Finally to then introduce the "any driver" paragraph bears no relationship to the rest of Mcleod's arguement.For once I believe that a true insurance man is right and the insurance ombudsman wrong.John PooleWorthingLetters intended for publication should be sent to Insurance Times, 30 Cannon Street, London, EC4M 6YJ, or faxed to 020 7618 3499, or emailed to firstname.lastname@example.org