2,734
edits
Difference between revisions of "ICBC and Compulsory Coverage (12:X)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
ICBC and Compulsory Coverage (12:X) (view source)
Revision as of 01:54, 7 October 2022
, 01:54, 7 October 2022→10. Forfeiture of Claims and Relief from Forfeiture
| Line 144: | Line 144: | ||
Certain conduct by the insured or applicant can result in “forfeiture”, whereby the insured is deemed to have given up their right to be indemnified by ICBC. In this situation, the claim for indemnification becomes invalid. Apart from exclusions, a claim may be forfeited under s 75 of the ''IVA'' if: | Certain conduct by the insured or applicant can result in “forfeiture”, whereby the insured is deemed to have given up their right to be indemnified by ICBC. In this situation, the claim for indemnification becomes invalid. Apart from exclusions, a claim may be forfeited under s 75 of the ''IVA'' if: | ||
:(a) an applicant for coverage falsely describes the vehicle in respect of which the application is made to the prejudice of the insurer (s 75(a)(i)); | |||
b) an applicant for coverage knowingly misrepresents or fails to disclose a fact required to be stated in it (s 75(a)(ii)); | :(b) an applicant for coverage knowingly misrepresents or fails to disclose a fact required to be stated in it (s 75(a)(ii)); | ||
:(c) then insured violates a term or condition of or commits a fraud in relation to the plan or the OIC (s 75(b); see [[{{PAGENAME}}#11. Breach of Conditions and Consequences | Section X.B.11: Breach of Conditions and Consequences]]; | |||
:(d) an insured makes a “wilfully false statement” with respect to the claim (s 75(c)). | |||
:'''NOTE''': According to [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/1994/1994canlii3304/1994canlii3304.html?autocompleteStr=brooks%20v%20insurance&autocompletePos=3 Brooks v Insurance Corporation of British Columbia], 1994 CanLII 3304 (BC SC), per Bouck J, the purpose of s 19(1)(e) (now ''IVA'', s 75(c)) is to prevent intentionally deceitful misstatements for the purpose of defrauding the insurer; “exaggerated guesses” by an insured as to the value of a lost motor vehicle, or figures inserted for the purpose of goading an insurer into action, are insufficient to deny coverage unless a fraudulent purpose on the part of the insured is shown. | |||
'''NOTE''': According to [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/1994/1994canlii3304/1994canlii3304.html?autocompleteStr=brooks%20v%20insurance&autocompletePos=3 Brooks v Insurance Corporation of British Columbia], 1994 CanLII 3304 (BC SC), per Bouck J, the purpose of s 19(1)(e) (now ''IVA'', s 75(c)) is to prevent intentionally deceitful misstatements for the purpose of defrauding the insurer; “exaggerated guesses” by an insured as to the value of a lost motor vehicle, or figures inserted for the purpose of goading an insurer into action, are insufficient to deny coverage unless a fraudulent purpose on the part of the insured is shown. | |||
However, ICBC may relieve the insured from forfeiture under s 75 if said forfeiture would be “inequitable”. Furthermore, ICBC must relieve an insured from forfeiture if: a) it is equitable to do so, and b) the insured dies or suffers a loss of mind or bodily function that renders the insured permanently incapable of engaging in any occupation for wages or profit (''IVA'', s 19(3)). | However, ICBC may relieve the insured from forfeiture under s 75 if said forfeiture would be “inequitable”. Furthermore, ICBC must relieve an insured from forfeiture if: a) it is equitable to do so, and b) the insured dies or suffers a loss of mind or bodily function that renders the insured permanently incapable of engaging in any occupation for wages or profit (''IVA'', s 19(3)). | ||