Question: Award of Monitary Compensation After a Claim

EDIT:I just got off the phone with Zach from Capri: his answers were precise and Very Positive!!! I will wait for his official reply in the new year for the answers.

I have Zach’s verbal permission to copy his reply, from a reply and/or PM, to this original post.


Capri;

I was just reading the Insurance policy (here: https://firearmlegaldefence.com/wp-c...y-v1012-16.pdf) and wanted some clarifications on the policy before I decide to buy for the new year. I am not trying to bash Capri and/or Firearm Legal Defence when I ask these questions: I would rather understand the policy under the rarest and extreme circumstances than be ignorant for not asking.

I am asking it in the forum instead of on the phone so it will hopefully encourage others to understand the policy and want to purchase firearm legal defence!

Let's say for example (using this specific example to mitigate any possibility of non-firearms related charges occurring):
The insured is using LAR mags with a capacity of 10 rounds of 5.56x45/.223Rem in a non-restricted firearm like the ATRS Modern Varmint. The insured is out legally walking on their own lawfully owned property hunting coyotes for the purpose of predator control on their hobby farm during the day when a RCMP officer stops the insured, arrests them and charges them with the LAR mags being a prohibited device for holding in excess of 5 rounds of 5.56x45/.223Rem in a semi-automatic firearm. The insured has proof of a valid PAL; proof of lawful ownership of the rifle, ammunition and LAR magazine; proof of ownership of the land and proof that during their hunting the insured was not in violation of provincial and other regulations (distance from a house, etc.).
The insured also, during the event of being arrested, have actions taken against the insured by the officer(s) that they feel are also criminal (assault by the officer) and/or abuse of the insured's human rights. The insured call Firearm Legal Defence immediately upon being allowed their council. The prosecutor agrees to proceed with charges, likely quite a few, including the charges of possession of a prohibited device.
The insured decides to not only plead 'Not Guilty' to all charges but immediately start a civil suit for a large sum of money for the actions taken against them by the officer(s) that the insured feels are also criminal (assault by the officer) and/or abuse of their human rights.

Again, I am not trying to bash Capri and/or Firearm Legal Defence when I ask these questions: knowledge is power.

1a. If the prosecutor decides to try a plea bargain to get the insured to plead guilty to a charge that results in only a fine (no seizure, no firearms restrictions, no jail time, etc) does the exclusion 3K apply, or does the underwriter pay that fine?

awards and/or demands of compensation, repayment, damages, liability, surcharge levies, interest, fines, penalties or tax of any nature including but not limited to those which the Insured is ordered to pay by any relevant court, board, commission or other tribunal or administrative body;

1b. Should the above plea bargain be presented, should the insured decide to refuse the plea bargain, can the underwriter force the insured to do so, such as clause 6.5?

if the Insured rejects any offer to settle a claim by way of payment into court or otherwise which the Underwriting Manager considers reasonable and recommends acceptance of, then no further indemnity will be provided by the Underwriter from the date of rejection by the Insured.

2a. Should all charges be dropped, the Underwriter pays all legal fees incurred by the insured, but the insured proceeds with a civil suit with a separate legal council due to the actions taken against them by the officer(s) that the insured feels are also criminal (assault by the officer) and/or abuse of their human rights (not a part of or due to the criminal proceedings at all); can the underwriter then influence and/or be required to be a part of the civil suit. such as 6.7?

The Insured must take all reasonable measures to minimize the costs of any claim under this Policy including but not limited to pursuing settlement negotiations and must consider all reasonable settlement offers.

2b. Should an award be made to the insured as part of the civil suit because the court agrees that the insured had criminal actions taken against them (assault by the officer) and/or abuse of their human rights, does the insured have to reimburse the underwriter for the payments made for the firearm legal defence case, such as 6.6?

Whenever the Insured is awarded costs or costs are included under the terms of any settlement, those costs are to be repaid to the underwriter. In every claim the Insured and the Appointed representative shall make every effort to make a full recovery of costs. Where a settlement purports to be a global or a without costs settlement, the Insured agrees that the Appointed Representative’s appraisal of a fair and reasonable proportion of that settlement will be deemed costs and shall be due to the Underwriter.

Again, if I won a civil suit for $500K I'd be happy to reimburse the Firearm Legal Defence underwriter, but that's not the point: it is about understanding the possible actions of the underwriter. These are the tough questions I demand of my broker for my house, vehicle and other insurances so you are not special in that regard Capri.

3. Should the insured decide to enact their policy with Firearm Legal Defence even though they are more than able to pay for the legal defence themselves (maybe for firearm specific council, extra legal help, whatever) can the underwriter deny the claim when no other reason would be applicable under the policy?

4. Should the insured also be a member of firearm organization(s) and wish to enact council from them as well, can the underwriter deny the claim and/or other council, such as per 6.4(v)?

Where the Appointed Representative wishes to obtain the opinion of or instruct other counsel or experts, it must provide its reasons and seek and receive the prior written consent of the Underwriting Manager.

Thank you very kindly for your time, and hopefully very honest and satisfactory answers to my questions.

All great questions... But insurance companies are for profit.. And they will pay as little as possible..
They really don't care what happens to the accused...

No insurance company is going to spend money on a defence if the insured is knowingly breaking the law or any regulation under that law. Insurance companies are not there to protect you, that is there sales line to persuade you to buy the insurance. As always it's buyer beware, and if it's to good to be true it usually is.

Very good questions

Aniest - All excellent questions and no doubt Capri will have a lawyer respond to them. As said in the previous posts, insurance companies are businesses that sell a product. To what extent that product provides protection will depend solely on interpretation, something we're all familiar with (i.e.: motor vehicle warranty, BX25 magazines, etc.).

Originally Posted by GUB

All great questions... But insurance companies are for profit.. And they will pay as little as possible..
They really don't care what happens to the accused...

I'd gave to agree 1000%. Insurance companies are about selling policies and collecting premiums, not about paying out claims. One of the biggest scams out there...

In your example, why would the police have the right to patrol your private property in the bush without warrant?

Originally Posted by Rideau

In your example, why would the police have the right to patrol your private property in the bush without warrant?

ok change it from police to conservation officer

its all hypothetical but valid points/questions from the OP

Originally Posted by Rideau

In your example, why would the police have the right to patrol your private property in the bush without warrant?

A simple " we had reports of gunshots" is all they need.

Originally Posted by Rideau

In your example, why would the police have the right to patrol your private property in the bush without warrant?

Well .. LE can do what they want.. And if you have enough money you MAY get the charges dismissed?? Or take a plea deal and get on with your life...