Unique insurance can protect gun owners against frivolous charges

You guys should really read the policies, neither firearmlegaldefence nor DAS are going to Supreme Court to fight your mag charges. Both will get you a deal at first opportunity. Magazine will be either destroyed or pinned properly. Both policies will react the same way, it's clear in the wordings. Don't buy either policy because magazine charges, buy it for what it actually covers. I'm tired of these policies being sold as something they are not. I'm tired of greedy brokers trying to sell them and give people hope. You guys have to educate yourselves. Legalfirearmdefence.ca is a business, they will tell you what you want to hear. Call the guys at CCFR and see who you feel more comfortable with. Capri has a new underwriter who's already changed their wordings around self defence... and added more stringent legalize wordings to the policy, I also have a feeling the price is going up. CCFR is still $92 tax in and offers a legal advice only option for $16 tax in per year. Don't get duped, buy these policies for what they are, not what you want them to be.
 
Last edited:
I think the title of this thread pretty much sums up what this insurance will cover: frivolous charge. For example, your exGF send the cops on you for no good reasons and gets your guns seized. Happened to a friend of mine, he was not insured and believe me, he wishes he was.
 
LuckyLuc82 said:
You guys should really read the policies, neither firearmlegaldefence nor DAS are going to Supreme Court to fight your mag charges. Both will get you a deal at first opportunity. Magazine will be either destroyed or pinned properly. Both policies will react the same way, it's clear in the wordings. Don't buy either policy because magazine charges, buy it for what it actually covers. I'm tired of these policies being sold as something they are not. I'm tired of greedy brokers trying to sell them and give people hope. You guys have to educate yourselves. Legalfirearmdefence.ca is a business, they will tell you what you want to hear. Call the guys at CCFR and see who you feel more comfortable with. Capri has a new underwriter who's already changed their wordings around self defence... and added more stringent legalize wordings to the policy, I also have a feeling the price is going up. CCFR is still $92 tax in and offers a legal advice only option for $16 tax in per year. Don't get duped, buy these policies for what they are, not what you want them to be.
Click to expand...

Very well said.
 
LuckyLuc82 said:
You guys should really read the policies, neither firearmlegaldefence nor DAS are going to Supreme Court to fight your mag charges. Both will get you a deal at first opportunity. Magazine will be either destroyed or pinned properly. Both policies will react the same way, it's clear in the wordings. Don't buy either policy because magazine charges, buy it for what it actually covers. I'm tired of these policies being sold as something they are not. I'm tired of greedy brokers trying to sell them and give people hope. You guys have to educate yourselves. Legalfirearmdefence.ca is a business, they will tell you what you want to hear. Call the guys at CCFR and see who you feel more comfortable with. Capri has a new underwriter who's already changed their wordings around self defence... and added more stringent legalize wordings to the policy, I also have a feeling the price is going up. CCFR is still $92 tax in and offers a legal advice only option for $16 tax in per year. Don't get duped, buy these policies for what they are, not what you want them to be.
Click to expand...

I never purchased this for what I wanted it to be, I bought it for what it was....Have you looked at any policy you have signed? Underwriters aren't in the biz because we benefit....
 
berger said:
I never purchased this for what I wanted it to be, I bought it for what it was....Have you looked at any policy you have signed? Underwriters aren't in the biz because we benefit....
Click to expand...

I look at them for a living. So yes, I can form an educated opinion... MOST Underwriters are nothing more than glorified paper pushers, they aren't experts, nor understand 95% of what they "underwrite". The people who write the wordings aren't much better, if you knew the story of how "legal defence" was created you'd laugh your ass off and shake your head. The broker, the person on the phone when you call for advice/clarification, isn't always right. BUT when you need this coverage, and I mean really need it, make sure you have someone in your corner who can go to bat for you against the "underwriter" otherwise you're screwed. Anytime you're dealing with a new broker/underwriter relationship you can bet your bottom dollar the broker ain't going to bat for you, they don't want to lose the market. I'd rather deal with the devil I know, than the devil I don't. DAS legal knows this product and has offered it for years now, plus now they don't have two brokers vying for their attention. In the past the two brokers dealing with DAS were constantly at odds with each other, one wanted the price lowered the other one wanted it higher and wouldn't allow competition.... Not everyone is in this for the money, some who are involved want this as affordable as possible, and available to all gun owners. If you do your research you will figure out who's who.
 
What I wrote isn't an attack on any one person, just a bit of insight on what's been the case over the last 16 months. I'm just trying to make everyone aware of what the product is, and not have your dreams shattered when its not what you thought it was.

Its a stop loss for charges in relation to use, storage, display, transportation, licensing, or handling of a firearm. Its not a bulletproof vest, its a warm cozy security blanket. If the carrier doesn't make money on it, then price will go up or coverage will change, no matter how nice the broker is on the phone.

Here is an interesting tip bit that gets asked all the time: My original RPAL applications was denied, but I have a PAL, can you represent me in an appeal? Answer to that is, NO. Original applications are never covered, but if you had a RPAL and your renewal was denied, then thank your lucky stars you bought this.

If you're a farmer in Saskatchewan and got interviewed about having a gun in your tractor for protection and proudly support that stance, you may have a hard time convincing the underwriter that your act of self defence of person/property was not a willful act, therefore risk denying you coverage. Not saying that thats what will happen, just saying if the optics are bad and public opinion is against you the carrier will look for ways out of it.
 
Last edited:
OneBarfly said:
This is a show-stopper for me:

"....5. Offers to settle a claim

(b) If you do not accept an offer we, based on the advice of the appointed representative, consider reasonable to settle a claim, we may refuse to pay further legal costs."

So, if the Crown offers a crappy deal, the insurance company can just say it was a reasonable offer in their opinion, so tough nuts to you. This section should be better defined for me to be comfortable with this clause.
Click to expand...

Insurance is great, in theory.

Years ago, when this product was first announced, I was very excited and immediately bought it. After reading the terms - they are entitled to decide who your lawyer will be (or no money), and they are entitled to dictate a guilty plea (or no money), etc. - I view it as worthless, so I didn't renew it. Since then I've gotten an unbelievable amount of high-pressure spam from the broker; spam doesn't make me buy things, spam makes me NOT buy things. In my opinion, we don't need an insurance company as much as we need a co-op, like a made-in-Canada version of the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network (ACLDN). For any lawful act, ACLDN guarantees a base level of support; you get to pick your own lawyer, and nobody dictates anything as a condition of assistance. ACLDN has an advisory board - made up of names you recognize and trust - who decide whether you'll get the next levels of support, based on the merits of the case. The advisory board members decide that, and I trust them more than I trust any insurance company.

If my assessment about this 'insurance' is wrong, I apologize.
 
Wendell said:
Insurance is great, in theory.

Years ago, when this product was first announced, I was very excited and immediately bought it. After reading the terms - they are entitled to decide who your lawyer will be (or no money), and they are entitled to dictate a guilty plea (or no money), etc. - I view it as worthless, so I didn't renew it. Since then I've gotten an unbelievable amount of high-pressure spam from the broker; spam doesn't make me buy things, spam makes me NOT buy things. In my opinion, we don't need an insurance company as much as we need a co-op, like a made-in-Canada version of the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network (ACLDN). For any lawful act, ACLDN guarantees a base level of support; you get to pick your own lawyer, and nobody dictates anything as a condition of assistance. ACLDN has an advisory board - made up of names you recognize and trust - who decide whether you'll get the next levels of support, based on the merits of the case. The advisory board members decide that, and I trust them more than I trust any insurance company.

If my assessment about this 'insurance' is wrong, I apologize.
Click to expand...

I'm totally with you on this one, creating something like you describe will take time, there are multiple regulatory issues to overcome, and efforts are already underway. It's slow as molasses, in the meantime, you're absolutely right, no one should harass you once you cancel or non-renew. Take it from someone with intimate details of what's going on in the industry, current offerings are great for what they are, the wordings may seem in the insurers favour, but if you read on it also speaks about a panel who will decide if there are any disputes/disagreements. Every lawyer who represents you has to do so to the best of their ability, and neither carrier can dictate to settle the case because it will cost too much to fight it, they must convince you that the deal you're getting is fair. Legally, you are going to get the best deal possible, otherwise you expose a billion plus dollar insurance company to a conflict of interest lawsuit. Insurer will more likely cancel the program the following year than try to screw a customer and risk their reputation, those days are pretty much gone.
 
I failed to mention that ACLDN membership benefits are only available in the USA; we can join, but it's only good while we're stateside; that is why I said we need a made-in-Canada version of it.
 
Corrupt legal system

TedNugent said:
"Bernardo claims there have been cases where charges have been dropped once the crown discovers the defendant has firearm legal defence insurance."

Wow, that's maddening. How corrupt is our legal system when people are punished by the crown who knows they don't have a case.
Click to expand...

You have no idea how corrupt. Police working directly for the benefit of lawyers by not investigating prior to laying charges, Crown Prosecutors hanging on to ridiculous trumped up charges until a fat cheque is handed to the defense lawyer. Tells you who is running the show.
 
Karl said:
You have no idea how corrupt. Police working directly for the benefit of lawyers by not investigating prior to laying charges, Crown Prosecutors hanging on to ridiculous trumped up charges until a fat cheque is handed to the defense lawyer. Tells you who is running the show.
Click to expand...

This is the "legal system" we have in Canada. "Justice" is no longer in the house, it left with Elvis...
 
I signed up $95 a yr. But I called to ask questions about club discounts mentioned on their site left a message almost a week ago and no reply.

So if I ever need them I sure hope they learn how to use the phone
 
LuckyLuc82 said:
I'm totally with you on this one, creating something like you describe will take time, there are multiple regulatory issues to overcome, and efforts are already underway. It's slow as molasses, in the meantime, you're absolutely right, no one should harass you once you cancel or non-renew. Take it from someone with intimate details of what's going on in the industry, current offerings are great for what they are, the wordings may seem in the insurers favour, but if you read on it also speaks about a panel who will decide if there are any disputes/disagreements. Every lawyer who represents you has to do so to the best of their ability, and neither carrier can dictate to settle the case because it will cost too much to fight it, they must convince you that the deal you're getting is fair. Legally, you are going to get the best deal possible, otherwise you expose a billion plus dollar insurance company to a conflict of interest lawsuit. Insurer will more likely cancel the program the following year than try to screw a customer and risk their reputation, those days are pretty much gone.
Click to expand...

Been saying this all along. +1
 
I would also like to hear from anyone who actually had to rely on the policy. On my quick read the insured must pay all bills and be invoiced directly by the lawyer. I don't see anywhere that the insurer must pay for the defence while it is underway. Being possibly reimbursed is a lot different than having the insurer pay along the way.

Also the Underwriters have an incredible amount of discretion in forcing a settlement. This makes a bit of sense in a civil claim, and no sense in a criminal charge.

Maybe the Underwriters will be great to deal with, but don't fool yourself, they hold all the cards under the terms of the policy.

One positive takeaway is that this would never be considered by an Underwriter if they thought it would be a common occurrence. So clearly firearms owners who are involved enough to look at insurance are not getting into trouble very often. So we are good people!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom