Court in Canada says carrier doesn't have to pay.

[Cornelius]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sask...ay-insurance-man-died-drug-overdose-1.6904931

 

[Al3x Lee]

Sad situation but I'm curious what the language was in the exclusion clause that was cited in the article

 

[shonceman]

What’s not stated is that the premiums would have been refunded (unless Canada is somehow different from the US on this). The article implies that the insurance companies were happy to take his premiums and then pocket them! In reality, after refunding premiums, the companies would have lost money due to underwriting and claims processing costs.

 

[adjusterjack]

Sad situation but I'm curious what the language was in the exclusion clause that was cited in the article

The Court of Appeals decision quotes the exclusions in each of the two policies:

"The exclusion found in the Mortgage policy states that the insurers will not pay a life or terminal illness benefit if “your death is a result of or while you were committing a criminal offence” (emphasis in original). The LOC policy exclusion is worded more expansively. It states that no benefit would be payable if “your death is a result of, associated with, or happens while you are committing a criminal offence” (emphasis in original). As can be seen, the words “or associated with” and “happens” appear in the LOC policy but not in the Mortgage policy."

And then goes on to a lengthy analysis of how the exclusions do or do not apply.

2023 SKCA 76 (CanLII) | Jantzen Estate v TD Life Insurance Company | CanLII

 

[Al3x Lee]

The Court of Appeals decision quotes the exclusions in each of the two policies:

"The exclusion found in the Mortgage policy states that the insurers will not pay a life or terminal illness benefit if “your death is a result of or while you were committing a criminal offence” (emphasis in original). The LOC policy exclusion is worded more expansively. It states that no benefit would be payable if “your death is a result of, associated with, or happens while you are committing a criminal offence” (emphasis in original). As can be seen, the words “or associated with” and “happens” appear in the LOC policy but not in the Mortgage policy."

And then goes on to a lengthy analysis of how the exclusions do or do not apply.

2023 SKCA 76 (CanLII) | Jantzen Estate v TD Life Insurance Company | CanLII

Thanks for the analysis! I figured it was likely a crime exclusion or something of the sort. Unfortunately for this guy, the policy probably gave him a false sense of security for his family, likely causing him to spiral even deeper into his addiction. He probably assumed he could forego responsibility. After all, he figured his family would be compensated for his untimely loss.

Don't do drugs kids.

 

[Cornelius]

So if someone gets drunk and hits a pole they won't pay?

 

[DHK]

I think it would depend on if he was declared suicidal or not. Suicide could happen in multiple ways including drug overdose.

I noticed that we weren't told when the policies were originally put inforce.

 

[Cornelius]

I think it would depend on if he was declared suicidal or not. Suicide could happen in multiple ways including drug overdose.

I noticed that we weren't told when the policies were originally put inforce.

Well driving drunk is a crime so from that ruling it would seem like a carrier wouldn't have to pay.

 

[Cornelius]

Well driving drunk is a crime so from that ruling it would seem like a carrier wouldn't have to pay.

He got the policy on Dec 2015 and died Feb 2018 per link to court doc above.

 

[goillini52]

I wonder how the life insurance companies are going to look at this?

[EXTERNAL LINK] - Canada’s New Euthanasia Laws Carry Upsetting Nazi-Era Echoes, Warns Expert