Unique insurance can protect gun owners against frivolous charges

[darkwing327]

Okay, so I sent in a couple of questions to two email addresses...also asked which one is best to communicate...this is the response.

"Thank you for your business. We’re glad to see that the CGN forum is getting interest.

With regards to your questions, the free telephone legal advice service is just that, a telephone service. This service doesn’t provide any written responses, only over the phone opinion and advice. You will need to contact the telephone hotline at 1-877-832-7534. As you can imagine, with a cost of only $95/year, written responses could not be included in the coverage. However, we will endeavor in the future to look into having written responses as an additional option available."

Not saying whether this is good or bad yet, but it is my opinion that written is always better than phone, especially when it comes to legal. It gives the time to thoughtfully construct your questions and ensure they are complete; and gives the respondent time to think about their answer prior to giving it. It also gives a written record of what answers/advice was given. Verbal does not do that unless the call is recorded.

Being in business and having spent a great deal of money on legal, I have always found the lawyers give better advice when allowed time to review the question as opposed to having to give one on the fly during a telephone call.

Not trying to be a sh$t disturber, but I spend a ton of money on business and personal insurances and because of their varied coverages, have made claims on a few over the years....and of those, only one has ever went easy where they paid me with as little fuss as when I pay them. All the others made me jump through hoops to ultimately come to the same policy payout outcome that was due in the first place. I am wary of insurance providers! However, in saying that, one of my policies is actually with Capri insurance which is local to me. I have never made a claim with them so can't comment, but as mentioned have sent in the payments when due hoping that they will do the same should an issue ever arise.

[NVShooter]

Okay, so I sent in a couple of questions to two email addresses...also asked which one is best to communicate...this is the response.

Thanks for sharing!

[toxic]

I spoke to Capri insurance today. The gentlemen I spoke to was a broker not a lawyer, which makes perfect sense based on the nature of my question.

We had a very positive conversation. The answer to my coverage question as it pertains to the Ruger 10/22 magazines is something that he has put forward to his underwriters. He was expecting to have an answer this week but now expects it to be next week. Apparently the underwriters are very carefully reviewing the matter and in particular the 2013 RCMP bulletin. I also mentioned that what is happening with the 10/22 magazines is not really unique and cited the CZ858 and Sigarms interpretation as being in essence the same interpretation issues. I also mentioned that it had happened with other firearms but because so few were in Canada, little noise was made about it. It did not sound like he was well versed on these previous interpretations but he did mention the Beo magazines as being a very similar issue as the 10/22 magazines. We had a bit of a discussion about the RCMP bulletin having information related to using different calibers in pistol magazines. He stated he is on a learning curve but that again his underwriters are reviewing this all very carefully.

He mentioned that he had spoken to several people about this; I responded by name dropping John at Wolverine. He offered that John stated was going to be post the response he would be provided on CGN. I stated I would do the same and also post a synopsis of our conversation today. I also informed him that John was very knowledgeable in this area and suggested that he could be a resource.

So my general sense here is that I believe this is legitimate insurance. Like any other insurance though, exclusions need to be reviewed and understood. Putting aside the issue of RCMP interpretation, I think this insurance could be beneficial to me at some point; like other insurance I carry. I don't anticipate my house will catch fire and I do everything I can to prevent that - yet I have insurance for that. In the event that I am ever charged by police who are not well versed in firearms regulations, I'd probably be happy to have this insurance. Transportation is one that comes to mind because a friend of mine ended up at an OPP station for several hours while they established if he was legally transporting a handgun - the issue there was with an ATT and while he was totally in the right, it caused him some stress and that story stuck with me.

Putting this all in the most simplistic terms.... If I torch my house I know I'm not covered by my fire insurance. If I leave a pot of oil on the stove unattended by accident and my house burns down, I should be covered by my fire insurance. I look at this insurance in the same way. I would not expect this firearms insurance to pay someone's legal fees if they were charged with something that they had to obviously have known was illegal. I think the concept of reasonableness comes into play.

I have no affiliation with the insurance provider or Wolverine supplies. I'm also not a lawyer or an insurance expert. Do your own homework and make your own decisions.

[PDub65]

Purchased.
For $85 + PST. Well worth it.

[darkwing327]

UPDATE:

I have not yet spoken to a lawyer as I had emailed my questions in and have been instructed that the service is telephone based to ensure confidentiality. As I am traveling, I have not had time to call in...HOWEVER...I did get a call back from a very nice lady at DAS insurance, as well as a number of email follow ups from Capri. All I can say in this regard is that they are very accessible and accommodating.

FWIW...I asked three questions....one based on my personal needs....and a couple more general questions that apply to all gun owners as I indeed bought the insurance for myself, but am also looking deeper into it before recommending it to our 700 member club. Simple due diligence.

What I did get from the lady at DAS...sorry I am terrible at remembering names....is that there has been THREE cases thus far in the 6 year history of the insurance...two resolved and won, including the molotov firebombing incident, which I was aware and asked. The second I do not know, nor could she release details. And the third is currently in process...no details could be given, of course.

The one item that was addressed is that to her knowledge there had not yet been any cases of Unsafe Storage or Transportation.

If anybody knows with certainty what the second case was, that would be helpful, but please, let's not speculate.

[JACKSMYDOG]

What worries me most about this insurance is the "willful" aspect of it. As example (not things I do, just examples);

-You stop at the store on your way home from a hunt, and forget to lock and cover your shotgun. Cop walks by, sees the shotgun and charges you with unsafe storage/transport. You willfully broke the law, will they deny coverage?

-RCMP charges you for prohibited device (BEO50 mags or BC 25/22 mags. I'm not saying the are illegal, but the RCMP is as times). You willfully owned and used "prohibited" mags and were caught. Will they deny your coverage to fight these charges.

I haven't had a chance to read the contract yet (nor will I likely be able to decipher it well enough to know the answer definitively) but these are situations I am concerned with. Before I do sign-up, I will be speaking with them directly about how, and when they are able to revoke coverage, and possibly asking for that clarification to be sent in writing for my further protection.

[darkwing327]

What worries me most about this insurance is the "willful" aspect of it. As example (not things I do, just examples);

-You stop at the store on your way home from a hunt, and forget to lock and cover your shotgun. Cop walks by, sees the shotgun and charges you with unsafe storage/transport. You willfully broke the law, will they deny coverage?

-RCMP charges you for prohibited device (BEO50 mags or BC 25/22 mags. I'm not saying the are illegal, but the RCMP is as times). You willfully owned and used "prohibited" mags and were caught. Will they deny your coverage to fight these charges.

I haven't had a chance to read the contract yet (nor will I likely be able to decipher it well enough to know the answer definitively) but these are situations I am concerned with. Before I do sign-up, I will be speaking with them directly about how, and when they are able to revoke coverage, and possibly asking for that clarification to be sent in writing for my further protection.

Yes, please reply back with the answers you get. I have asked the same general question about prohibited items using 10/22 mags as the discussion. What happens if they are declared prohibited but the farmer who has 13 of these things in every tractor and vehicle don't read these boards or follow firearm law just happens to be seen by the RCMP using this mag he has used for the last 20 years to shoot badgers and skunks in front of his combine.

I'm sure there are many thousands or tens of thousands of folks out there who are not gun nuts that have 'newly' prohibited stuff just laying around and not even knowing they have been declared criminals.

This is key to this insurance...if you are caught with a prohibited device, are you covered? Let's both ask this and get a definitive answer.

[Alex Jones]

are residents of Québec excluded

[darkwing327]

are residents of Québec excluded

Nope...included...you just have to call in I believe...info is on their website.

[megatron1337]

What worries me most about this insurance is the "willful" aspect of it. As example (not things I do, just examples);

-You stop at the store on your way home from a hunt, and forget to lock and cover your shotgun. Cop walks by, sees the shotgun and charges you with unsafe storage/transport. You WILLFULLY broke the law, will they deny coverage?

-RCMP charges you for prohibited device (BEO50 mags or BC 25/22 mags. I'm not saying the are illegal, but the RCMP is as times). You willfully owned and used "prohibited" mags and were caught. Will they deny your coverage to fight these charges.

I haven't had a chance to read the contract yet (nor will I likely be able to decipher it well enough to know the answer definitively) but these are situations I am concerned with. Before I do sign-up, I will be speaking with them directly about how, and when they are able to revoke coverage, and possibly asking for that clarification to be sent in writing for my further protection.

How is forgeting to lock your door, WILFULLY breaking the law? That makes no sense.
Willfull generally signifies a sense of the intentional as opposed to the inadvertent, the deliberate as opposed to the unplanned, and the voluntary as opposed to the compelled.
In criminal-law statutes, willfully ordinarily means with a bad purpose or criminal intent, particularly if the proscribed act is mala in se (an evil in itself, intrinsically wrong) or involves moral turpitude.