Canadian Underwriter

Category: Claims

Why embedded insurance keeps this lawyer up at night
When it comes to embedded insurance, the risk of insurance activities being performed by unlicensed individuals or entities is probably the biggest concern, a Dentons lawyer said Wednesday at Insurance Bureau of Canada’s InSight Summit.

Dentons partner Marisa Coggin was discussing a “laundry list of things that keep [her] up at night on embedded insurance,” which involves the integration of insurance directly into a customer’s digital purchase journey, such as buying travel insurance with a flight or device protection with a mobile phone. The use of unlicensed individuals or entities, whether corporate or platform-based, topped her list.

“This is probably the biggest bucket, because you’re moving through the customer journey, and you’re starting at solicitation, and you have to think about, ‘Okay, how does the customer get introduced to the concept that there is insurance available at all?’” Coggin says. “Because they didn’t come on this website looking for insurance, right?

“Maybe some people have that in the back of their mind, but most people will not.”

How the referral partner or resale partner is conveying the insurance product is important, Coggin says.

“Is it limited to sort of saying, ‘Here’s our marketing partner, here’s our insurance partner, who can give you insurance on this product,’ and that’s the end of it? Or is it a bit broader than that?” she asks. “So, I think that’s an important piece to look at to make sure they’re not acting in an agent capacity; and also having the proper APIs [application programming interfaces] to link the customer to the licensed platform or entity.”

Real-life example

The issues surrounding embedded insurance came to a head recently when Quebec’s broker association raised concerns about the province’s deferment of a legislative amendment that prohibits auto and recreational vehicle dealerships from offering replacement insurance. The product involves a replacement cost policy, in which an insurer pays compensation to replace a vehicle at the dealership the insured has chosen.

Lucie Fréchette, president of the Regroupement des cabinets de courtage d’assurance du Québec (RCCAQ), told Canadian Underwriter last month the association wrote a letter to the provincial government asking that they maintain the original July 1, 2026 prohibition implementation date.

But the government postponed the prohibition until Jan. 1, 2027. At that time, ‘distributors’ — including auto and recreational vehicle dealerships — will no longer be permitted to offer replacement insurance related to vehicles they sell or lease. The product must instead be obtained through licensed representatives and firms in Quebec, such as property and casualty insurance brokers or agents, Dentons said in a March 2 bulletin.

Looking ahead, coverage questions may pose another concern with embedded insurance, Coggin says.

“I recognize a lot of these products right now are pretty straightforward, and you may not have a ton of questions,” she says. “But I think as the complexity grows, you’re going to have customers or potential clients who are going to say, ‘Okay, wait. What about this exclusion? And what does this exactly cover?’

“Eventually, and I think right now, best practice is always to have a licensed person available during normal business hours to answer questions.”

Some factors to consider include:

Whether consumers have an opportunity to review terms and conditions, and have access to a full copy of the policy (ideally delivered by a licensed broker).

Whether a licensed TPA (third-party administrator) or other party is involved for claims adjusting.

Ensuring carriers have sign-off on all websites with customer-facing/promotional materials, and that partners have the proper roadmap and scripting so representatives understand what they can and can’t do.

Regarding automatic enrollment (for membership and affinity association-type plans, for example), provide consumers a chance to opt into the program. “Usually, the customer either doesn’t know they’re getting insurance coverage or doesn’t understand what the cost of that coverage is, and they can’t opt out,” Coggin says.

Remuneration/compensation structures – i.e. no compensation if individuals/entities don’t hold licensing for acting as an ‘insurance agent.’

Ensuring customers know when they are dealing with artificial intelligence and that they can opt out and deal with a human licensed agent, should they choose.

Finally, all parties must comply with applicable privacy rules. Sometimes, carriers and retail partners can act in silos, leading to a lack of collaboration and understanding, Coggin says.

“At first, the customer is okay with giving their information to you, the retailer, let’s say,” Coggin explains. “They’re not expecting necessarily for it to be transferred to someone else, much less for all the expanded uses that we are not using all of this data and information for.”

It’s also important to be mindful of geography, or data-crossing borders. “Because there’s all sorts of rules about transfer of information or personal information.”
April 2, 2026
Atlantic Canada’s messy winter has been hard on students, seniors

ST. JOHN’S – Schools were closed in parts of Atlantic Canada on Wednesday as the region faced yet another onslaught of snow, freezing rain and howling winds, prolonging a winter season that has been difficult for many students and seniors.

Frequent storms have forced repeated shut downs of university counselling services and Meals on Wheels programs for seniors in the region, cutting people off from help and social contact.

Ken Fowler, director of Memorial University’s student counselling centre in St. John’s, urged anyone who might be struggling to ask for help. He also encouraged those who aren’t struggling to watch out for signs of distress in their friends and classmates.

“Check in on each other,” Fowler said in an interview. “Send a text, try to stay connected with people.”

Wednesday began with a mosaic of weather warnings across much of Atlantic Canada. Environment Canada warned of freezing rain and ice buildup in parts of southern New Brunswick, P.E.I. and the northern half of Nova Scotia. In eastern Newfoundland, the weather agency called for up to 15 centimetres of snow, which would mix with ice pellets later in the day.

Schools were closed in parts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, P.E.I. and Newfoundland.

In fact, Wednesday was at least the seventh snow day for schools in the St. John’s area since Jan. 1.

The frequent closures led to cancelled appointments for those who used the student counselling centre at Memorial, Fowler said. The storms kept students isolated and cooped up indoors, adding another stressor to a demographic already prone to loneliness and depression, he said.

“A lot of research says it’s a bunch of small things that, when they actually gather, they can make life really unmanageable,” Fowler said in an interview. “When you have a student that’s going through financial stress, or relationship issues, or are homesick, not being able to get to campus — which is a bit of an oasis for them — is a difficult thing.”

Sue Nesto, executive director of the Dartmouth Seniors Service Centre in Nova Scotia, said she had to cancel more meal delivery days this year than usual, cutting seniors off from much-needed food and companionship.

“For some people, that’s the only socialization they get,” Nesto said in an interview.

It broke her heart to cancel the service, but the volunteers who deliver the food are seniors, too, and they can’t be out in ferocious conditions, walking through knee-deep snow, she said.

The centre also offers a regular lunch. When a storm blows in and forces Nesto to close the doors, that lunch and social opportunity is no longer available, she said.

Most people she speaks to are taking the weather with a grain of salt, she said, adding that anybody who has lived in Nova Scotia all their lives knows to expect some wild weather.

“Though we’re certainly hearing a lot of ‘I’m tired of the weather,’ and hope that spring is going to come soon,” she said.

The first day of spring was technically March 20, but the weather hasn’t caught up yet.

April 2, 2026
SAAQ chasing $1.5 million wired to fraudsters posing as IT vendor

Quebec’s public auto insurer has turned to the Ontario courts after losing $1.5 million in an apparent “spoofing” cyberscam.

In a statement of claim filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Toronto, the Société de l’Assurance Automobile du Québec (SAAQ) says that in early March, fraudsters tricked the insurer into sending two separate payments to a CIBC bank account in Sudbury, Ont., in the mistaken belief that the account belonged to an IT vendor it had recently retained for data management services.

In addition to seeking damages and legal costs from the alleged fraudsters, SAAQ’s claim also asks for a court order to freeze the remaining funds in the CIBC account where the money was allegedly sent. SAAQ also seeks an order to obtain any records the bank holds about the account owners and their assets.

According to SAAQ’s claim, which has not been proven in court, the fraudsters laid the groundwork for their heist back in December 2025, communicating with SAAQ via fake email addresses “designed to mimic the legitimate” addresses of the IT vendor.

In those original messages, the fraudsters, posing as the IT vendor, warned SAAQ they were planning to change their direct deposit information and requested details of pending payments owing to the IT company, citing an upcoming annual reconciliation and audit.

The fraudsters followed up in February this year, providing SAAQ with its new direct deposit details, supported by a void cheque from CIBC and a faked “letter of direction” that appeared to be on the IT vendor’s letterhead.

In early March – the precise dates are not specified in the claim – SAAQ then made two payments to the new bank account: one for $830 and another for $1.506 million.

Also in the news: New and improved benefits under Alberta’s Care-First auto reforms

The claim says SAAQ only discovered the scam on Mar. 11, when the public insurer issued a standard deposit notice to the IT vendor’s legitimate email address. In response, the IT vendor said it never received the money, and the bank account where it had been sent did not belong to them. SAAQ filed its legal action less than a week later, on Mar. 17.

Geneviève Côté, a spokesperson for SAAQ, said in a statement that the insurer is not anticipating any financial loss, due to its swift discovery of the fraud and prompt actions in response. While the legal proceedings continue, SAAQ will not be making any further comment, she added.

Cyber claims in Canada went up by 102% over the course of 2025, according to a recent report by the cyber insurer Coalition.

Any increase in 2026 could be just as spectacular, if the experience of Rafaella Rullo is anything to go by.

Rullo, a lawyer in the Toronto office of law firm DWF Group, frequently assists clients with the recovery of funds lost in transfer frauds as part of her practice focusing on privacy and cyber security.

“We’ve seen a massive uptick, even within the last year. The primary reason is the fact that these attackers are becoming so much more sophisticated. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to pinpoint indicia of fraud,” she says. “Long gone are the days when you get a funny email written in Comic Sans with something very conspicuous.”

According to Rullo, the success of the recovery process depends largely on how quickly the victim can report the fraud to both their own financial institution and to the recipient’s.

“In my experience, the ‘safe window’ is usually about a 48-hour period,” she says, adding that smaller sums typically have a lower recovery success rate, because it is easier for fraudsters to move the money out of their account without raising suspicion.

Dave Oswald, the founder of Forensic Restitution, a fraud detection and recovery firm based in Oakville, Ont., says red flags should always be raised whenever a supplier asks to change their bank payment details.

“As soon as you have a request, pick up the phone and call someone at the supplier that you actually know, not just any number you see at the bottom of their message,” he says. “Ask them if they actually meant to change their bank account or if it’s a fraud attempt, in which case it will be stopped at that point in its tracks.”

April 1, 2026
How eliminating fixed amounts in Ontario’s new optional benefits could lead to broker E&O claims

Ontario’s new auto reforms may open up brokers to new errors and omissions exposure, since Ontario’s auto insurance reforms leave it open for insurers to negotiate with customers over the maximum benefit amounts for optional benefits, insurance defence counsel warn.

Once-mandatory benefits such as income replacement, housekeeping, and dependent care are converting to optional benefits as of July 1, 2026.

Currently, these benefits all have fixed maximum payment amounts under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS).

But once these benefits become optional in July, the new reforms say only that the payment amounts may “not exceed the amount fixed by the optional benefits.”

Those amounts will be “fixed” based on negotiations between the insurers and their customers. That leaves defence counsel saying it could potentially be a “Wild West,” “a bidding war,” or a “no-holds-barred” negotiation over who gets what payments for optional benefits.

And that kind of scenario could come back to bite brokers, cautioned Andrea Lim, a partner at Dutton Brock LLP. She spoke as a panellist at the Ontario Insurance Adjusters Association conference held in Toronto last Thursday.

“Potentially, there are going to be some inconsistencies in the market,” Lim told claims adjusters attending the conference. “Now we’re dealing with no standardized monetary or fixed amount for optional benefits….

“For insureds…it looks as though you’re going to have to negotiate. And this could potentially result in shopping around for different insurers. And they’re going to look for the best à la carte option.

“There’s going to be a possible increase in claims litigated at the LAT [Licence Appeal Tribunal] because of all this. And there is a good risk of broker liability insurance claims coming up.”

Current guidance from Ontario’s insurance regulator, the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA), notes there is a limit to changing the fixed amounts in non-renewed auto insurance policies when the mandatory benefits convert to optional benefits on July 1.

“Expiring policies must renew with pre-July 2026 coverages and limits until the consumer agrees to make changes in writing as per SABS regulation.”

Currently, the mandatory income replacement benefit includes a fixed, maximum weekly amount of $400. Consumers have an option to purchase increased limits of $600, $800, or $1,000.

“That’s all going to be replaced now,” Lim said. “It’s essentially a figure that could be decided upon between the parties. It’s really up to the insured and the insurer to decide, and FSRA has to approve it.”

FSRA has published online Q&As regarding proposed changes to the optional benefits reforms. It confirms the ability of insurers to negotiate lower amounts than what are fixed in current benefits.

From FSRA’s Q&A: “Can an insurer file for lower limits than current ones? Example, income replacement of $300/week.”

To which FSRA responds: “Insurers have the flexibility to offer various benefit limits if the options are supported with evidence of consumer need provided that current limits are offered.”

Also, housekeeping, home maintenance, and caregiver benefits — which are currently available only to “catastrophically impaired” insureds — will be available to those who are simply “impaired.”

“The amendment here, of course, is that Cat [impairment] is no longer required,” Lim said. “It’s not a requirement for the application for entitlement to it. On top of that, it’s just somebody with an ‘impairment.’

“And so I’m sure that there’s going to be a lot of debate in terms of what would qualify as an impairment.”

March 31, 2026
Final tally for March 2025 Ontario and Quebec ice storm

Final cost estimates from Catastrophe Indices and Quantification Inc. (CatIQ) place the final insurance industry loss estimate for the Mar. 28-31, 2025, ice storm in Ontario and Quebec at $466 million.

This is the fifth, and final, estimate from CatIQ and serves as a snapshot of the insurance market one year after the event.

The estimate notes the loss number covers both commercial and residential property claims, as well as auto claims, including additional loss adjustment expenses. There’s a slight decrease from the $490 million estimate issued last September due largely to a decline in personal lines losses for Ontario.

“This final estimate shows a slight decrease in the personal line losses versus the six-month mark, which, as noted at the time, demonstrated somewhat above-average growth last autumn,” says CatIQ director Caroline Floyd.

“At this point, it seems reasonable to expect that insurers feel comfortable they have received all the outstanding claims, particularly those related to any seasonal access properties, and have released their additional reserves.”

Related: Toll from Quebec and Ontario ice storms…so far

Floyd says claims data indicates more than 90% of personal lines claims have been closed, which is consistent with expectations for an event of this ice storm’s magnitude one-year on.

The multi-day March storm saw Ontario’s Kawarthas region experience 35 hours of freezing rain, resulting in up 25 mm of ice accumulation. That ice strained power lines, trees and other surfaces, leading to widespread damage and power outages for hundreds of thousands of utility customers.

Some of those disruptions lasted for weeks and may have slowed people’s ability to visit impacted properties, leading to further loss tallies.

In a related statement, Insurance Bureau of Canada adds the storm was 2025’s costliest severe weather event across Canada, and it ranks as the sixth costliest storm in Ontario’s history.

“Severe weather events continue to intensify. Insured losses from catastrophic weather and wildfires have nearly tripled over the past decade, rising from $14 billion annually to $37 billion, while claims have almost doubled,” says Maximilien Roy, IBC’s vice president for strategy.

“This reality demands a different approach to how we build and plan communities – and investing in resilience now is critical to keeping Canadians safe and insurance available and affordable.”

March 31, 2026
Are Nunavut hamlets ‘uninsurable’?

Municipalities in Nunavut received $78 million dollars from insurance companies between 2018 and 2025, convincing Canadian companies to declare communities in the territory “uninsurable,” according to Peter Boucher, principal attorney for the Nunavut Association of Municipalities Insurance Exchange.

During that period, hamlets received more than 10 times as much from insurance companies as they paid in premiums, Boucher explained to a crowd of municipal officials at the Baffin Mayor’s forum on March 11.

Hamlet buildings, water tanks, trucks, and any other property a community government insures are often in poor condition and likely to result in an insurance claim, he said.

In May 2025, hamlets were close to being left without insurance before the Government of Nunavut agreed to step in, just before the non-profit Nunavut Association of Municipalities Insurance Exchange was ready to end its operations.

“The board was ready to wind up your insurance program, potentially exposing all of you to going to buy insurance for yourselves. And I can tell you right now, most communities are uninsurable,” Boucher said.

Instead, a new system for insuring hamlet-owned property and assets is being enacted this year.

UK insurance [market] Lloyd’s of London is now covering hamlet-owned property, but at a much higher cost to Nunavummiut taxpayers.

The GN is providing $11.25 million to help cover the expenses, up from $850,000 in past years, according to Boucher.

But hamlets could still see their insurance premiums spike if their assets aren’t up code.

“Insurance is only a means of spreading payments over time. It’s not a new pool of money. So we’ve explained to the Government of Nunavut that the price that we pass on to you is not dictated by us. It’s dictated by our losses, our values and outside factors,” Boucher said.

Building inspectors will be travelling to each community to assess the condition of hamlet building roofs, water boiler storage and vehicle garages. Eight municipalities will be inspected per year.

Communities with poor infrastructure will pay more, and communities in good shape will pay less.

“If Arctic Bay is fully code compliant, we will credit them. And if another community isn’t compliant at all, then they will get a debt. They’ll get an additional charge,” Boucher said. “If you have a 35 per cent increase in your asset value, you can expect a 30 per cent increase in your insurance cost next year before we even talk.”

March 30, 2026
How those to be excluded from optional benefits will try to access them

Insurance defence lawyers expect claimants’ lawyers to argue their clients are “dependents” under Ontario’s new auto insurance reforms, in a bid for excluded injured passengers, pedestrians and cyclists to gain access to optional benefits.

As of July 1, Ontario is changing its auto insurance policies to convert several of its mandatory benefits — including income replacement, housekeeping, and death benefits — into optional benefits. The rationale is that Ontarians will now be able to opt out of previously mandatory benefits in order to reduce their insurance premium costs.

One flashpoint, however, is that optional benefits are now available only to named insureds on auto policies, including drivers, their spouses, dependents, and other regular drivers listed on the policy.

And so, lawyers are sounding the alarm that pedestrians, cyclists, and certain passengers (including children) who are injured in car accidents may no longer have access to optional benefits, if they are not named in an auto policy.

“The immediate change is really going to be the pedestrians, the passengers, the cyclists, who have to claim accident benefits,” Julianne Brimfield of SBA Lawyers said at the 2026 conference of the Ontario Insurance Adjusters Association (OIAA), held in Toronto last Thursday. “And because the optional benefits are only payable to a very limited number of people — it’s the named insured, spouse, dependent, a regular user or a listed driver — the people who don’t fall into those categories are going to try and find a way to get into one of those categories….

“There’s going to be a lot of room for people to try and make claims as a ‘dependent.’ And those disputes, if it’s just between the person claiming benefits and the insurer, are all going to go to the LAT [Ontario’s Licence Appeals Tribunal]. So now the LAT adjudicators are being asked to deal with these coverage issues more often.”

Also in the news: Auto reforms: Ontario adjusters seek fix to maintain access to optional benefits during transition

Andrea Lim, a partner at Dutton Brock LLP, noted that injured pedestrians, cyclists and passengers will still have access to mandatory accident benefits, even if not the optional benefits.

“What happens to an uninsured pedestrian or cyclist?” Kim asked at an OIAA conference session. “The standard accident benefits will still apply to the uninsured pedestrians and cyclists. They still have access to the med rehab and attendant care, in accordance with the limits under the existing SABs [Statutory Accident Benefits].

“So that’s key. They’re not completely out of receiving SABs or being able to access it if there are no optionals, and if they’re underinsured.”

But to access optional benefits, claimants’ counsel will likely argue their clients are “dependents” in an auto policy, predicted Laurie Walker, president of Walker Consulting & Auditing.

Caselaw in family law shows the definition of a “dependent” has become somewhat more elastic over time, particularly in an age of blended families and shifting parental roles and responsibilities.

“The dependent situation is where I think we’re going to see the stretch,” Walker said at the conference. “We see it quite a bit when we have separated or divorced parents.

“Mom’s got a policy. Dad has a policy. And do we see care combined? You’re either chiefly, principally, 51% dependent for finance or for care.

“Well, one parent might be the breadwinner, and they meet the test under finance, but they can also meet the test for care under that policy. So, can I be dependent on both?

“My answer [regarding] the child [situation] is, ‘Yes.’ So that’s where we’re going to see the challenge.

“One policy for a parent may carry just $65,000. That’s it, that’s all they could afford to pay for. My broker said, ‘This is the cheapest way to get the policy.’ But the other policy might carry the full complement of things [including optional benefits]. So, we need to do that investigation.

“Either you’re a listed driver or you’re not right. You’re either a policyholder or you’re not. It’s those two other pieces [either dependents or spouses] where it’s going to be, ‘Can I have more than one spouse? I absolutely can. And it’s the same with the children.”

March 30, 2026
Auto reforms: Ontario adjusters seek fix to maintain access to optional benefits during transition

$Bone fracture foot and leg on male patient with splint cast and crutches during surgery rehabilitation and orthopaedic recovery staying at home$

Ontario’s adjusters are sounding the alarm about potential disputes arising from reduced access to optional accident benefits immediately following the implementation of the province’s auto insurance reforms on July 1.

As it currently stands, once the reforms take effect on July 1, non-renewed auto policies after that date will not have OPCF-47 endorsement forms attached. Those forms ensure access to auto optional benefits available through more than one policy. In other words, some drivers may lose access to optional benefits that they’d otherwise be entitled to receive by virtue of being named insureds on other auto policies.

Under Ontario’s accident benefits legislation, the OPCF-47 form, which is part of the auto insurance policy, allows drivers who have purchased optional accident benefits to claim those benefits from their own insurer, thus overriding the statutory priority of payment rules. In exchange for this override, they agree not to make a claim under any other policy.

For example, if Anne is injured in an accident while in a car driven by Fred, Ontario’s accident benefits priority rules say Anne must claim from Fred’s insurer first. Let’s say Fred’s policy doesn’t have optional benefits. Without the OPCF-47 form, Anne would not be able to override that priority of payment to access the optional benefits she purchased from her own insurer.

Ontario adjusters are concerned about what will happen on or after July 1, 2026, when mandatory benefits in existing non-renewed policies are converted into optional benefits.

“The policy itself is going to look the same on June 30 as it does on July 1. Nothing magically changes,” Laurie Walker, a 40-year veteran of the claims industry and president of Walker Consulting & Auditing, told delegates attending the Ontario Insurance Adjusters Association (OIAA) conference in Toronto Thursday. “The hitch, though, is [that] until that [auto] policy renews, all the existing coverages revert to what we call optional.

“If my date of loss is June 30, I can access priority of payments, and I can access those benefits. But after July 1, there’s no OPCF-47 attached to that policy.

“On June 30, it was a standard policy. It came with $400 a week in income replacement benefits and all the variety of benefits. But on July 1, those now become optional. The policy still carries it, but that policy does not have that OPCF-47 [endorsement]. So the problem is, I might not be able to access those benefits because that endorsement is lacking.”

Walker, a past president of the OIAA, gave the hypothetical example of getting into a crash and having a proof of loss on June 30.

On that pre-reform date, she would have access to two policies, she explained. She would have her own renewed policy, which theoretically offers just the basic $65,000 in medical coverage. But she would also have access to optional benefits coverage on her husband’s policy, which has not renewed yet.

Also in the news: Intact COO talks about M&A preferences for Canada

But as of July 1, since there is no longer an OPCF-47 attached to her husband’s non-renewed policy, she would not have access to her husband’s optional coverage, even though she is listed as a driver or “spouse” on her husband’s policy.

Walker wants the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) to issue guidance for what happens between the time the reforms launch on July 1 and when all of Ontario’s existing auto policies are renewed.

One solution, Walker says, is for FSRA, as Ontario’s insurance regulator, to issue a bulletin outlining how to handle the missing OPCF-47 forms on non-renewed policies as of July 1.

“If we don’t have a directive to add that OPCF-47 in some way, shape or form, we are going to have multiple disputes,” Walker said. “My hope and belief and my prayer…is that FSRA will issue a bulletin or guideline…

“I am hoping that they come up with a bulletin that says, ‘Listen, effective July 1, all existing policies that have not yet renewed shall be deemed to carry the OPCF-47.’ That will allow the transfer [i.e. to another policy carrying the optional benefits, thus bypassing existing priority of payment rules].”

At this suggestion, Walker turned to her fellow panellist Callie Matthews, a training and research officer at the Ontario Mutual Insurance Association, who is actively working in working groups with FSRA to prepare the reforms. “I’m working on it,” Matthews quipped, pretending to be defensive. The light-hearted exchange suggested it’s an issue already known to FSRA.

March 27, 2026
Top court rejects claimant’s bid to re-open 2004 settlement with insurer

Canada’s top court has rejected the final appeal of a person injured in an auto accident who wished to rescind his settlement agreement with his auto insurer 15 years after the settlement, on the basis that he hadn’t signed one section of the settlement disclosure notice (SDN).

Thanh Ho was injured in an auto accident on Dec. 19, 2000, and sought statutory accident benefits from his insurer, Allstate Insurance.

The two sides disagreed about several matters, went through multiple mediation sessions, and then hammered out a binding settlement in 2004.

Counsel for the insurer, Allstate Insurance, wrote the regulator in November 2004 to say, “there was an oversight on his part,” the 2023 ruling of the Licence Appeal Tribunal states. “[Ho] had not been directed to sign the acknowledgment on page 6 of the SDN, and it is alleged that [Allstate] was unable to obtain [Ho’s] signature despite numerous attempts.”

Nevertheless, in February 2005, FSCO (the Financial Services Commission of Ontario, now replaced by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario) wrote Ho to tell him the settlement had been finalized, and the regulator would be closing its file on the matter.

Seven years later, in March 2019, Ho’s new counsel notified Allstate he wished to reopen the arbitration hearing and mediate for income replacement benefit and housekeeping benefits. He returned the settlement funds to the insurer.

Also in the news: BrokerLink expands again in Ontario, Alberta

Allstate argued Ho shouldn’t be allowed to re-open the settlement, for several reasons. Among them, he didn’t apply to rescind the binding settlement within two business days of it being signed, as required by Insurance Act regulations.

Ho contended the SDN was not compliant because he didn’t sign one section of the settlement notice. The unsigned part of the document states: “I acknowledge that I have received and read the above Settlement Disclosure Notice provided to me by an insurer, and have considered whether or not to obtain legal, financial and medical advice.”

Allstate, on the other hand, told the LAT that Ho did in fact sign the SDN, albeit not above the acknowledgement line at page 6, which confirms acknowledgement of reading the settlement notice and consideration of obtaining legal and/or medical advice.

In fact, Ho and a witness “initialled each page of the SDN including page 6, which triggered the two-day cooling off period to rescind the settlement that had been entered into on May 17, 2004,” as the LAT summarized Allstate’s position.

“In my view, the fact that [Ho] initialled every single page of the SDN suggests that he understood the settlement,” LAT Adjudicator Tavlin Kaur ultimately ruled. “Furthermore, he did not take issue with the settlement for many years.

“As such, I find [Ho] had two business days to rescind the settlement from the time that he settled his claim on May 17, 2004. I find that he did not rescind the settlement within two business days after signing the SDN and release. Therefore, I find he is bound by the terms of the settlement.”

Ho appealed the decision to the Ontario Divisional Court, the Ontario Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada. All declined to hear his appeal, culminating in the Supreme Court’s decision to deny leave to appeal last week.

As is customary, the Supreme Court does not give reasons for denying leave to appeal.

March 26, 2026
Intact COO talks about M&A preferences for Canada

When considering future mergers and acquisitions (M&A) opportunities in Canada, firms offering insurance product manufacturing and distribution remain “the number one priority” for Intact Financial Corporation, chief operating officer Patrick Barbeau tells a March 25 fireside chat.

That’s “followed closely by global specialty lines. And that means U.S. in particular, but also because of our global capabilities, [the] U.K. and [Ireland] or Canada,” he says during the National Bank of Canada Capital Markets’ 24th Annual Financial Services Conference.

Barbeau says the current M&A environment is more active than in the past 12 to 18 months. “Our approach to M&A has not changed…first it needs to be a good strategic fit,” he says.

“We’re looking for assets that have a very good overlap with what we’re already doing in the geographies [where] we operate. We’re not about trying to plant flags in more geographies…we would look for assets that have a good overlap with the lines of business we’re already in.”

He adds both large and small firms may be reviewed for M&A, and that Intact does many smaller deals, particularly in distribution – citing BrokerLink’s recent deals.

There’s also interest in managing general agents (MGAs) “in the context of specialty lines.”

Referring to Intact’s current balance sheet and excess capital, Barbeau says the company “could deploy around $5 billion in acquisition before issuing shares…we could issue shares on top, but it gives an idea of how much dry powder we have.”

Tech-based drivers

In Canada, he tells the conference, Intact’s been deploying technology with brokers that simplifies the quoting process – allowing them to make more quotes, and do it faster to create larger volumes of new business.

He notes the artificial intelligence (AI) evolution is underway and that companywide, “we’ve implemented more than 600 AI models within our system, at scale and in the operations.” He adds that’s currently creating recurring annual benefits of around $200 million – and the goal is to get to around $500 million by 2030.

First priorities are to deploy AI to improve the loss ratio, and in pricing segmentation and claims. “When we automate decisions and underwriting and claims, we do it with by leveraging the specific and very precise view of the profitability of every policy,” Barbeau says.

The next AI priority is boosting the top line with investments that improve customer journeys. And the remaining priorities are software engineering and efficiency.

Looking at the company’s structural drivers of return on equity (ROE), Barbeau says an evolving mix of business, specifically growth in commercial and specialty lines, has changed Intact’s portfolio over time.

“These lines of business are producing higher ROE on average, not only now but if you look at the longer term. So that’s creating a shift in the business,” he says.

Related: AI disrupted UK’s personal lines distribution. Why Intact exec says it won’t happen in Canada

And, in terms of introducing technologies, he tells the conference AI and pricing sophistication models were initially used in in personal lines. “We’ve been deploying these models into commercial lines and specialty lines – and also outside of Canada – and we see that it’s producing at least the same kind of benefits in improving the combined ratio.

“That’s another reason we think the [company’s] ROE is in a new zone and more structural than cyclical. We don’t really worry about cycle, because our pricing decisions are made at the policy level. Yes, we want to make sure we cover inflation, but then the final decision of writing risk or not is at the policy level. And our underwriters have these indicators on their screen[s]. They know the walk away price.”

March 26, 2026