After a fire at a property, insurers discovered that the sprinkler system was not working as the insured's tenant had turned the system off and placed a filing cabinet against the control handle. Further, the water supply to the property had been cut off as the tenant had not paid the charges. The Court of Appeal held that there had been a material change to the facts stated in the proposal form (ie that the property was protected by a sprinkler system). The tenant's actions evidenced an intention for the system to remain out of action indefinitely such that it was not protecting the property as required by the proposal form. As turning off the system indefinitely took the risk outside what was in insurers' reasonable contemplation at the time the policy was issued, this also amounted to a material alteration to the property. Insurers were therefore entitled to cancel the policy (Qayyum Ansari v New India Assurance Ltd [2009]2).