Court Rules Locked Car in Rome Parking Lot Not Secure, Limits Payout for Stolen Valuables
Translated & summarized from N12 by baba
A family that had NIS 67,000 worth of belongings stolen from a rental car in Rome in April 2025 sued their insurer, AIG. The Small Claims Court in Herzliya awarded the father, David Bassa, only NIS 845, ruling that a locked car in a camera-monitored parking lot is not a "secure place" under the policy. The court also excluded coverage for certain valuables and dismissed a claim for emotional distress.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- A family lost NIS 67,000 in valuables stolen from a rental car in Rome.
- The insurer, AIG, paid only NIS 15,167 of the total claim.
- A court ruled a locked car in a camera-monitored lot is not a "secure place."
- The father, David Bassa, was awarded NIS 845 by the Small Claims Court.
- The court excluded coverage for certain valuables like jewelry and electronics.
- A claim for emotional distress was dismissed due to insufficient detail.
A family whose belongings worth NIS 67,000 were stolen from their rental car in Rome, Italy, has won a partial victory in small claims court. The family was on their last day of a trip in April 2025 when they stopped at a shopping center for 20 minutes on their way to the airport. Upon returning to their car, they found it had been broken into, and luggage, clothing, electronics, jewelry, and a passport were missing.
AIG, the travel insurance provider, paid out NIS 15,167 but refused to cover the remaining valuables. The family, consisting of five members, sued for NIS 32,988. The Small Claims Court in Herzliya, presided over by Judge Efrat Or-Elias, awarded the father, David Bassa, only NIS 845.
The family argued the car was parked in a secure, camera-monitored lot, with the stolen items locked in the trunk and hidden. They claimed their policy covered valuables up to $2,000 per person. AIG contended that items like laptops should have been kept in a safe and that certain items, including mobile phones, cash, jewelry, and perfumes, were not covered.
The court determined that the applicable policy was AIG TRAVEL CENTURION, associated with American Express Centurion cardholders, based on the documentation submitted by the family. While the policy stated that items left "in a locked vehicle out of sight" were considered supervised, an exceptions clause excluded valuables like jewelry, watches, cameras, computers, and electronics unless they were on the insured person's body or in a securely held bag, "except if deposited in a safe or other secure place."
Judge Or-Elias ruled that a locked car in a public, albeit camera-monitored, parking lot does not qualify as a "secure place." She explained that a secure place must offer protection equivalent to carrying the items on one's person or using a safe, and that while cameras might deter thieves, they do not provide actual protection against theft. The judge also dismissed the claim for emotional distress due to lack of detail and ruled that each party would bear its own legal costs.