The F1 heiress learned she and her husband weren’t able to claim any money back for the stolen items as the insurance policy for their mansion contained an exemption clause for watches and jewellery

Tamara Eccleston’s ‘lesson’ after break-in at home saw £25m in jewels nicked(Image: Dave Benett/Getty Images)

Tamara Ecclestone and her husband, Jay Rutland, were unable to recoup any of the £25million lost in their burglary due to an insurance catch, it is reported. The F1 heiress learned she and her husband weren’t able to claim any money back for the stolen items, including jewellery and watches, as the insurance policy for their sprawling mansion in Kensington, west London contained an exemption clause for watches and jewellery, which had previously gone unnoticed.

International jewel thieves had ransacked the family’s property while they were on holiday in Lapland in late 2019. It left Tamara, 40, traumatised and so the socialite had to take extra security measures to protect her family. Insurance lawyer Peter Mansfield, Partner at RPC, discussed the insurance policy and urged people to “read your policy and understand it”.

Insurance lawyer Peter Mansfield, Partner at RPC, shared his two pence on the matter

He said: “Very sadly for them, Tamara Ecclestone and Jay Rutland lost £25million because of an exclusion in their insurance policy, but there are lessons to be learnt from this oversight.

“The message is very simple: read your policy and understand it. Most policies nowadays are written in plain English – while they can be lengthy, they are generally straightforward.

“At the very least, you should check the policy schedule, which sets out a summary of the cover. This is not a case of checking the small print, but instead, the big print.

International jewel thieves had ransacked the family’s property while they were on holiday in Lapland(Image: Instagram)

“Many home and contents policies will provide insurance for valuables up to a certain value, for instance, £5,000. However, if you have any particularly expensive items, like high-value jewellery and watches, you will be asked to disclose these in the proposal form. If those valuables total £25million, both you and your insurers would almost certainly want them to be separately insured.”

Peter went on to say it is important to “understand the exclusion and conditions in your policy”.

The thieves spent many days scouting the mansions of London’s rich and famous before selecting their final targets: the homes of Frank and Christine Lampard, the late Leicester City owner Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha and of course, the Ecclestone mansion on Billionaires’ Row.

Two years after the crimes were committed, three men from Italy pleaded guilty at Isleworth Crown Court to conspiracy to burgle in three raids.

Art investor Jay, 43, recently discussed the incident and said he accepted responsibility for the lack of diligence. He said: “Our total insurance claim was for, I think, 40 grand or 45 grand, something like that, which was for the doors in the house because [the burglars] literally smashed down about 25 or 30 doors.

“If you can imagine, every door to every room was locked. So that meant they had to crowbar each door open. So, I remember we claimed on the insurance for those doors to be replaced, but that was it. Nothing else was insured. Don’t get me wrong, that’s our own fault and clearly it teaches you the importance of checking the small print. But that was one of the exclusions in the policy – watches and jewellery, very specifically.”