An elderly couple living in Dublin returned home one evening to find the back door of their house kicked in. The house had been ransacked and all their valuables, including many items of great sentimental value, had been taken.

They contacted us and we attended promptly. As we normally do, we took photographs of the house including, crucially, the smashed back door and frame. Insurers appointed a firm of Loss Adjusters and a few days after we met them on site they told us that they were recommending to the Insurers that they repudiate liability on the grounds of the policyholders’ non-compliance of a policy warranty. The policy stated that all exterior doors were to be fitted with a five-lever mortise deadlock. The door through which the thieves gained access was fitted with a two lever mortise deadlock and this, they contended, was sufficient grounds for the Insurers to refuse to meet the claim.

We examined the policy wording and concluded that whilst there had been a breach of a policy warranty, the breach was not material having regard to the circumstances. We were able to show from the photographs we took that the force used to break down the door was such that, even if there had been a five-lever mortise deadlock fitted the effect would, in all probability, have been the same. The frame was smashed and would probably have yielded to the force used, whatever type of lock fitted. Predictably, the Insurers did not share our view at first. However, we persisted and after a few weeks wrangling, they agreed to meet the claim.