Difference between revisions of "Optional ICBC Insurance (12:XI)"

Optional Insurance Contracts (“OICs”) are additional optional coverage that any person can purchase at his or her discretion. The following are '''some''' of the '''types''' of coverage, over and above the Basic Compulsory Coverage, that may be purchased at the owner’s option from a private insurance company. The term OIC includes, but is not limited to policies providing coverage for excess third-party liability, excess own vehicle damage, excess UMP coverage, and excess no-fault income replacement.  

'''NOTE''': The above prohibition, exclusion, and limit are not binding on the insured unless the policy has printed on it in a prominent place and in conspicuous lettering the words “This policy contains prohibitions relating to persons or classes or persons, exclusions or risks or limits of coverage that are not in the insurance it extends” (''IVA'', s 61(2)).  

The limit on the amount of indemnity payable is determined, by whichever of the following is lesser (''IVR'', s 169 & Schedule 10 s 5):

*conversion;  

g) using a vehicle in a manner contrary to the insured person’s statement in his or her application for coverage, the result being a form of breach of condition. This happens most commonly in cases where coverage of a vehicle for “pleasure purposes” is applied for, and the vehicle is damaged when in fact being used to take the insured person to or from work (s 55 sets out the specifics);  

<blockquote>a) the client can go through ICBC’s internal appeal procedure by asking the  adjuster to review his or her decision and, if there is no change, by asking the claims manager to review it. If the client is still not satisfied, the third step is to present the client’s case to an  appeal panel; or </blockquote>

There are two ways in which to frame the action. The plaintiff can either claim the total amount of damage resulting from the negligence, even though ICBC has already paid a portion of it, or the plaintiff can claim merely the amount that ICBC has not paid. Remember, however, that a plaintiff cannot collect twice, and if he or she sues for more than the deductible, he or she may be held to be acting as a trustee for the Corporation and therefore liable to account for anything in excess of the deductible. In either case, the plaintiff bears the onus of proving  the negligence alleged against the defendant.  

'''NOTE''': If ICBC denied liability to indemnify a person insured by it and that person is sued, ICBC is entitled to apply to the court to be joined as a third party (''IVA'', s 77(3)). Upon being made a third party, ICBC can then defend the action fully, despite its previous denial of  liability to indemnify the defendant (''IVA'', s 77(4)). In ''West v Cotton'' (1994), 98 BCL R (2d) 50 (SC), the third party, ICBC, conducted the defence of a defendant to whom it denied coverage and who did not participate in the  proceedings. Having succeeded in proving his claims, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover his or her costs, with one exception: that being against the third party. In this case, ICBC would have  suffered significant prejudice if it had been precluded from presenting its defences as third-party since the defendant did not demonstrate  any interest in maintaining the action.