Canadian Underwriter

Category: Your Business

P&C insurance regulators and OmbudServices seek to confer more often
Canadian property and casualty insurance regulators plan to meet more regularly with Ombuds agencies to ensure consumer disputes with P&C insurers are handled fairly.

The Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators (CCIR) published last month a revised Insurance OmbudServices Cooperation and Oversight Framework — the first update of the framework since its 2015 introduction.

The framework outlines how the insurance sector OmbudServices and CCIR cooperate to ensure an effective consumer dispute resolution in the Canada’s P&C insurance market.

The General Insurance OmbudService (GIO) is a national, independent not-for-profit organization helping consumers resolve disputes or concerns with their home, auto or business insurers.

“Updates to the framework include more regular meetings between regulators and the OmbudServices’ leadership and boards, as well as enhanced information-sharing to understand market trends and effectively address systemic issues,” CCIR says of the framework updates. “Going forward, CCIR will publish an annual public report that outlines its engagements with the OmbudServices.”

When consumers have a beef with their insurers, their first recourse is to take it up with the insurance companies. If they can’t resolve the dispute there, they can take it to the OmbudServices, which are at arm’s length from the government and independent of the insurance industry.

CCIR, which includes provincial regulators of Canada’s P&C insurance industry, says it updated the OmbudServices framework to “ensure the OmbudServices continue to maintain the confidence of regulators and consumers.”

To that end, the regulators want to meet more frequently with the OmbudServices and their executives.

Also in the news: Definity Q1 earnings show Travelers integration producing results

The updated framework says CCIR will meet with the executive management of each OmbudService a minimum of two times per year. One of those meetings will be dedicated to discussing one or two of the seven founding principles of the OmbudServices:

Independence

Accessibility

Scope of Services

Fairness

Methods and Remedies

Accountability and Transparency

Independent Evaluation.

Also, information-sharing between the CCIR and OmbudServices will become more frequent.

Each OmbudService will provide a quarterly report to the CCIR on consumer complaint volumes and the nature of complaints received.

Plus, each OmbudService “shall engage in open and productive dialogue with CCIR [two times] per year regarding identified trends, emerging trends under monitoring, and any reported systemic Issues,” the updated framework states.

Going forward, CCIR’s annual report will include a summary of its engagements with OmbudServices “and may identify areas for improvement arising from the annual dialogues,” the framework states.
May 11, 2026
Brokers less optimistic about growth in 2026

Brokers’ confidence in a strong financial future is slipping, according to Canadian Underwriter‘s 2026 National Broker Survey.

Sixty percent of 169 brokers surveyed predict their brokerage’s financial performance over the coming year will be ‘somewhat better’ or ‘much better’ than last year. That’s still a majority, but pales in comparison with the 74% of brokers who said the same thing in 2025. That’s a 14-percentage-point drop.

A further 33% say their brokerage’s financial performance will be static, against just 23% last year. Seven percent say it will be ‘somewhat poorer’ in 2026, compared to only 3% making that prediction last year.

What’s driving the erosion of optimism?

A slower economy, for one, say broker owners providing verbatim responses to the survey. Also, several principals cite shifts in client preferences as well as changes to regulation, with the latter expected to ding the bottom line while simultaneously improving client retention.

“My forecast is based on the auto reform that is supposed to come in next January,” says one broker in a large firm with more than 100 employees. “It is expected that average premiums will reduce, and retaining clients may be easier than it is this year.”

A respondent at a small firm adds: “Economy’s…slow, and customers can’t afford the insurance cost.” Another, small-firm owner adds, “The poor Canadian economy is a hindrance to growth in our brokerage.”

Related: How brokers are earning their ‘trusted advisor’ stripes

Women brokers are more likely (83%) to predict improved growth than men (52%). Small firms (73%) are rosy about growth, followed by brokers at large firms (50%) and those at mid-sized companies with between 20 and 99 employees.

Those newer to the industry (16 or fewer years in a brokerage) and veterans (with 31 or more years under their belts) tie at 67% for saying finances will improve in 2026. Those at mid-career (16 to 30 years in the brokerage business) are the least optimistic at 50%.

Broker principals who predict financial results will stay the same or grow marginally also reference Canada’s trade-impacted economy. “We hope to hold our own or grow a little, [the] present state of economy is slowing us down,” says a veteran broker owner at a small firm.

And a mid-career broker at a large firm notes, ‘The soft market in commercial lines did have an impact on our 2026 forecasting.”

Other commenters describe their growth trajectories as “significant” in verbatim comments to the survey. A mid-career owner of a small firm says the burgeoning mergers and acquisitions trend is helping her business.

“Consolidators are having the most impact on my business,” she tells the survey. “As long as consolidators keep giving [bad] service, I will do incredibly well.”

Canadian Underwriter’s 2026 National Broker Survey heard from 169 brokers, with 32 identifying as brokerage owners or principals. The survey was conducted in February 2026, with support from Sovereign Insurance.

May 11, 2026
‘Right now means right now:’ How urgency reshapes broker workflows

For brokers, urgency used to mean the occasional last-minute vehicle pickup or same-day home closing. Now, many say it defines the entire workday.

“Right now means right now,” said Pak Selvarajah, registered insurance broker at My Insurance Broker, describing the growing number of same-day requests brokers are navigating daily.

Brokers say the workflow itself has changed. Once a more linear process — handling renewals, quoting new business, and servicing clients in sequence — the workflow is now a constant state of triage. Urgent requests, remarkets, underwriting timelines, and client demands are all competing for immediate attention.

As workloads increase, brokers are rethinking how they organize and prioritize their workdays.

Selvarajah says he now relies on multiple systems to manage volume, including calendars, CRM software, and manual task lists to keep urgent files from slipping through the cracks.

“Two years ago, maybe I had five things to do today,” Selvarajah said. “Now I have 15 things on my list.”

That pressure is changing how brokers approach client service.

“Speed is a factor,” Selvarajah said. “But now I’m trying to look at what’s actually going on and how we can help the client.”

Heavy workloads also strain operational processes, thereby changing the relationship between brokers, underwriters, and technology providers — particularly in cyber insurance, where response expectations and threat environments continue to accelerate.

Also in the news: How Intact expects auto reforms in Alberta and Ontario to change its bottom line

“People have an expectation now to get responses quicker on a variety of levels,” said Erik Tifft, global head of underwriting at Boxx Insurance, a cyber specialist.

That expectation forces insurers and MGAs to rethink underwriting workflows.

“It’s less about prioritizing the urgent from the non-urgent,” Tifft said. “It’s about treating everything as urgent and using technology to make us faster and more efficient.”

Increasingly, that means relying on AI models, automated underwriting logic, and threat intelligence systems to rapidly process straightforward submissions while escalating more complex risks for human review.

“It’s not sequential anymore,” said Neal Jardine, Boxx’s chief claims and cyber intelligence officer. “It’s stacking.”

Rather than moving submissions step-by-step through underwriting, pricing, and intelligence reviews, multiple assessments now happen simultaneously to accelerate turnaround times without weakening risk analysis.

The goal, Jardine says, is not necessarily to reduce pressure, but to change where human expertise is applied.

“AI is not going to reduce the pressure,” he said. “It’s going to change the pressure and allow you to focus on the areas that you truly add value.”

But Boxx executives say the next competitive advantage will not simply be speed.

“The next phase of the market isn’t necessarily about who’s going to do it the fastest, but who’s going to do it the smartest,” Jardine said.

May 11, 2026
Why so few P&C insurers globally are successfully scaling AI
Property and casualty insurance organizations throughout the world are leaving money on the table by narrowly using AI to create “efficiencies” without fundamentally changing the human-centric processes that prevents them from scaling AI, a new global report says.

“AI strategies that mainly focus on efficiency create natural pressure for near‑term returns,” says the CapGemini report, The intelligence era in P&C, released this week.

“According to our analysis of the top 20 [global] P&C insurers, ranked by gross written premiums earned (S&P Global, 2025), only 35% explicitly link their AI strategy to business outcomes beyond efficiency.”

The report highlights a small group of intelligence trailblazers, roughly 10% of insurers, that are using AI to the best competitive advantage. Compared to their P&C insurance industry peers, these organizations have increased revenue growth by 21% and have bumped up their share prices by 51% over a three‑year period.

“These organizations outperform peers on revenue growth and share price performance by treating AI as a core operating capability, not just a technology initiative,” the report states.

P&C organizations need to change in three ways simultaneously to make the most out of AI, the report notes. They need to make technological changes, address talent changes, and also make operational changes.

Changing tech

Most organizations are focussing simply on the tech side, the report says.

“Insurers’ spending patterns make the challenge clear,” the report states. “On average, 72% of AI investments go toward technology and infrastructure, and only 28% to change management.

“That imbalance leaves many programs short of the organizational support required to move from pilots to full‑scale implementation.”

Changing talent and roles

It’s not just a matter of installing the AI, accessing and capturing unstructured data, and developing the data sets required for AI analysis, CapGemini notes. To make AI a core operating capability, companies must address talent and operational gaps as well.

For example, many agree only human experts can make judgment calls about an appropriate use of AI. This is what CapGemini describes as an “expert‑centric P&C insurer.” And they include “orchestration managers,” who translate business strategy into AI principles and govern how intelligence scales across the organization.

Without these types of experts, AI isn’t scaled. “But with them, [AI systems] become coherent, well‑governed systems.”

In addition to orchestration managers, three other types of leadership are required, says the report:

Executive leadership sets guardrails

Human subject matter experts such as underwriters, claims specialists, and distribution specialists define outcomes and establish the accreditation frameworks AI must meet before they’re trusted to act

Experts who handle situations when high‑volume work gets escalated, and complexity exceeds defined thresholds.

Collaboration between these experts across various departments in an organization remains a work in progress, CapGemini says.

“Changing how work gets done remains the central challenge, even for those already ahead on strategy, technology, and adoption,” the report says. “Forty-nine percent of employee time is spent on cross‑team collaboration, yet most AI tools operate at the individual task level, automating work after decisions are made rather than shaping those decisions.”

Ideally, AI would give executive and team members real-time access to data they need to shape strategic decisions, the report says.

To do this, a company will need to shift its focus from using only structured data to unstructured data. But only 12% of insurers reported high maturity in data readiness.

Changing operations and process design

Finally, insurers need to change their operations to incorporate the introduction of AI.

“AI has been added to workflows built for humans, including sequencing, handoffs, and decision points, none of which were originally intended to incorporate AI,” the report states.

On top of that, insurers need to address their workers’ suspicions about AI.

“Forty-three percent of employees cite job security as one of their top concerns about AI, and 25% worry that the transition to AI will increase rather than reduce their workload,” the report says. “Employees navigating genuine uncertainty about their future are unlikely to lean into a technology they associate with displacement.

“Until insurers address process design and the trust deficit together, transformation will remain out of reach.”
May 8, 2026
Are broker referral programs becoming more important?

Referral programs are always a key driver of broker business, but they’re viewed more favourably this year, say respondents to Canadian Underwriter’s 2026 National Broker Survey.

For 2026, 56% of respondents identify referral programs as a primary sales and marketing activity. That’s up from 50% last year, 54% in 2024, 52% in 2023 and 45% in 2022.

“My most effective tool has been client referrals,” says a verbatim reply by a newer broker at a smaller firm. “By providing clear advice, fast service and ongoing support, clients feel confident recommending me to others. This has been effective because referrals come with built-in trust, and it has led to steady growth in my client base without heavy marketing costs.”

Says another respondent: “Customer referrals – word of mouth brings in the best kind of customers.” Several other verbatim respondents note good service is the best generator of quality referrals.

Men responding to the 2026 survey (59%) are a bit more sold on the value of the referrals than women (52%). And those at mid-career (61%) with between 16 and 30 years on the job are most likely to favour referrals, as are those at small firms (50%), compared with their peers.

Brokers are less convinced about the value of traditional advertising, with 34% of 2026 survey respondents saying the tactic works for their firms, compared to 35% last year. Women (42%) are more likely to favour advertising than men (25%) and support for the tactic hovers within the 30% band for all firm sizes and age groups.

“We find public engagement by sponsoring community events gives us more visibility than traditional advertising,” says a woman respondent who works at a large firm with more than 100 employees and who is newer to the business.

Related: Brokers see rapid digital change as a major challenge for the channel

Another respondent who’s also newer to the brokerage and works at a mid-sized firm, stresses the value of step-by-step relationship building. “Traditional correspondence via phone and email [and] being accessible and quick to respond with competency and proving relatable to the client are the best tools,” he tells the survey.

“AI and software are an imitation and have their use, but are not the solution to maintain the broker-client relationship and will ultimately lead to high client turnover [and] shorter customer lifespan and subsequently higher premiums.”

Webinars, whitepapers, blogs and other customer education tools come in third at 32% in 2026, up from 29% last year. A broker working at a large firm who’s newer to the business says customer education tools support retention, reduce “complaints or surprises at claim time,” and drive better coverage decisions and trust.

“Educating our customers reinforces us as the ‘trusted advisor’ and directly impacts long-term business health,” he tells the survey.

Rounding out the Top 4, 28% of respondents say public relations and media outreach are important marketing tactics. That’s down from 32% in both 2025 and 2024, and 34% in 2023.

And, apparently, some firms are so successful that they don’t need to market.

“Our brokerage owner does not want to grow our business,” says a mid-career broker at a smaller firm. “He feels we can barely keep up with the clients we have, so does not invest in attracting new clients.”

Canadian Underwriter’s 2026 National Broker Survey heard from 169 brokers, with 32 identifying as brokerage owners or principals. The survey was conducted in February 2026, with support from Sovereign Insurance.

May 7, 2026
Navacord brokerage expands commercial platform ambitions
Navacord brokerage Jones DesLauriers Insurance Management Inc. (JDIMI) has announced a strategic partnership with Valebrook Family Office Inc. to support the growth and expansion of a commercial insurance platform across North America.

Valebrook is a multi-family office providing strategic advisory, capital solutions, and operating expertise to ultra-high-net-worth families, entrepreneurs, and institutions, JDIMI says in a press release Monday.

“Founded in Toronto, Valebrook is focused initially on Canada and Florida,” the company says on its website.

The deal became effective Apr. 1. “The partnership brings together Valebrook’s advisory-driven approach and strong client relationships with Navacord’s national brokerage capabilities, creating a platform positioned to deliver comprehensive insurance and risk solutions to business owners and enterprises,” Navacord says.

The collaboration is focused on building long-term client relationships and delivering tailored risk management solutions across key sectors including real estate, construction, manufacturing, and logistics.

Navacord says the deal reflects “a broader industry shift toward integrated advisory and risk solutions, as clients increasingly seek coordinated guidance across insurance, capital, and strategic planning.”

With more than 5,000 industry professionals and 150+ offices in Canada, Navacord delivers expert advice and tailored solutions in commercial and personal insurance, travel and specialty, group benefits, retirement, and financial planning.

Last November, Navacord began transitioning its broker partners to operate under a unified, national brand, although some legacy brands remain in transition. The rebranding process brought six broker partners under the Navacord banner:

Waypoint Insurance Services and Waypoint Benefits & Financial Services

Seafirst Insurance Brokers

Lloyd Sadd Insurance Brokers and Lloyd Sadd Consulting

Iridium Risk Services

Ives Insurance Brokers

Insurance Store.

Over the years, Navacord and its broker partners have made numerous deals, including a mega-merger in February between Navacord Corp. and Acera Insurance Services Ltd.

Combined, the two brokerages will place $7.2 billion in insurance and employee benefits premium and have $7.5 billion in retirement assets under management. Familiarity, scale, geographic diversity and product mix all played a role in the deal, the brokerages told Canadian Underwriter in February.

The two brokerages will work under their own brands until November and then will come under the Navacord banner, said Navacord president and CEO Shawn DeSantis and executive chairman T. Marshall Sadd.
May 7, 2026
Intact’s war chest for M&A is larger than the top-line revenue of some of Canada’s Top-10 insurers

Intact Financial Corporation has amassed a war chest of about $6 billion in capital to deploy for a future merger or acquisition, Intact execs revealed during the company’s 2026 Q1 earnings call Wednesday.

“I would say [we have] ample capacity to pursue large-scale M&A,” Intact Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Ken Anderson told an investor asking about M&A or share buy-back options. “Today, we could execute on a $6-billion transaction without needing to issue equity.”

During the call, an investor asked the company’s execs to expand on a comment that Intact could use capital to buy back shares to increase the insurer’s share value (i.e., fewer shares in circulation can lead to a higher price per share). The questioner wondered if that strategy might eat into the company’s available capital to deploy M&A.

The $6-billion in capital is “the backdrop where we are saying that we have the capacity to do both,” Anderson said during the call. “We can pursue the M&A opportunities, but when the shares are meaningfully, significantly undervalued, we’re in a position to support them [with a buyback].”

In 2025, Intact reported more than $17 billion in total insurance revenue, according to Canadian Underwriter’s forthcoming 2026 Stats Guide, which uses data provided by MSA Research. In 2024, it’s market share in Canada was 15.4%, with the next closest insurer, Desjardins, having a market share of 9.98%.

Also in the news: How brokers are earning their ‘trusted advisor’ stripes

Intact Financial Corporation CEO Charles Brindamour said the goal now is to grow the company’s Canadian “franchise,” a term encompassing market share, deepened broker-customer relationships, improved underwriting profitability, expanding geographic reach, and reinforcing the long-term durability of the company, among other things.

“I think in terms of opportunities, we would love to grow our Canadian franchise by 50%, and there are no constraints of any substance that would prevent us from doing that,” Brindamour said.

“If you look at the Canadian franchise performance — three points of top line [revenue] outperformance [of the rest of the industry], eight points of bottom line [profit] outperformance — if you do a transaction here, this is massive value creation.”

Investors queried whether there were still opportunities for Intact’s BrokerLink to make acquisitions in the broker distribution channel.

“We don’t talk about [the brokerage distribution channel] so much in terms of M&A, because it’s multiple smaller transactions, but it’s created a very good machine of earnings and stable earnings over time,” Brindamour said. “It’s helpful strategically to the insurance operations, and we’re deploying capital in that space as well….

“And whether it’s through BrokerLink or the brokers which we support and invest in to consolidate the [broker channel M&A] pipeline is actually very good. To be clear, BrokerLink [is] very active. We’ve done a large percentage of transactions in Canada last year.”

Brindamour added the company is also looking to acquire managing general agents (MGAs) to support its global specialty lines business. He cited as an example Intact’s acquisition of an 80% stake in Paris-Based Cartan Trade, which offers digital-focussed trade credit coverage.

May 7, 2026
How Canada’s commercial liability market is shifting

Canada’s commercial liability market has shifted decisively in favour of buyers in 2026, according to Aon’s Spring 2026 Canadian Insurance Market Update.

“After several years of constrained capacity and firm pricing, insurers are now competing actively for quality accounts, particularly in primary casualty,” the report says. “New entrants and established markets are broadening appetite, stepping up line sizes, and sharpening terms.”

Clients with strong risk profiles are seeing more choice and competitive pricing, Aon says. These clients are also seeing opportunities to enhance wording, expand coverage, and optimize program structure to align with current operations and contractual risk transfer.

The shifting commercial liability market is particularly visible in excess casualty, Aon says.

“Competition for participation on towers that were previously difficult to build is driving meaningful rate reductions and, in many cases, broader coverage for many industries,” the report says. “Capacity is generally accessible, but insurers remain mindful of aggregation and jurisdictional risk, often preferring smaller layers than were typical before the hard market.”

Accounts with heavy U.S. exposure, challenging loss experience or higher-hazard profiles are seeing more measured improvement, Aon says, highlighting the importance of targeted risk improvement, credible data, and clear risk narratives.

For many buyers, this landscape supports a fresh look at limit strategy and structure, including reassessing adequacy in light of social inflation and verdict severity, rebuilding or smoothing towers, and calibrating retentions to balance volatility with balance sheet strength. In many cases, a portion of savings can be redeployed into additional limits, better layering, or expanded protection.

That said, several structural challenges persist, despite broader softening.

U.S. jurisdictional risk remains a central concern, with social inflation (such as nuclear verdicts, or those exceeding $10 million) and litigation funding “sustaining elevated severity expectations,” Aon says. In addition, higher hazard classes, complex product manufacturers, and large fleet or transportation risks continue to attract close underwriting scrutiny and more cautious capacity deployment.

Coverage terms are generally stable and even “improving at the margins” in some cases, Aon reports.

Exclusions for per-and-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, also known as ‘forever chemicals’) and other emerging contaminants, wildfire, and specific geopolitical exposures remain commonplace, the brokerage says. But underwriters in 2026 are more open to tailoring language for well-controlled risks. And clients that can show strong governance, mature safety culture, and disciplined loss control are best positioned to negotiate refinements and, where appropriate, limited carve-backs.

Underwriting discipline has evolved rather than disappeared, Aon says. “Carriers are still selective, but the stance is more solution oriented, with a greater willingness to differentiate between risks and to adjust pricing, structure, and wording when presented with comprehensive, data rich submissions, clear risk narratives, and credible improvement plans.”

Liability underwriters continue to track a widening set of emerging exposures, including ongoing social inflation, changing litigation trends, environmental, social and governance related scrutiny, cyber and technology driven risks, and environmental liabilities.

2026 is a constructive time for organizations to reassess the design and performance of their casualty programs, Aon says. Priorities include improving exposure data (such as fleet, driver, and contractual information), strengthening safety and claims management practices, reviewing limit structures in light of verdict trends, and fine-tuning retentions and attachment points to reflect true volatility appetite.

Buyers that take a more strategic, data-driven approach in this phase of the cycle will be better positioned to navigate future shifts in capacity, pricing, and liability risk.

As one measure of underwriting profitability, the Canadian commercial liability market ended 2025 with a Net Insurance Service Ratio of 81%, Aon’s report says.

May 5, 2026
Canadian insurtech launches insurance shopping app within ChatGPT

Insurtech MyChoice Financial, Inc. has launched an auto and life insurance shopping application within ChatGPT, enabling users to explore the two types of insurance through a conversational interface.

MyChoice says it is the first company in Canada to offer such an app. It comes as insurers and insurtechs begin exploring how conversational AI can support customer acquisition and engagement, the insurtech says in a blog post Friday.

By the end of May, MyChoice expects to expand the app capability to include home insurance. It’s also planning to launch its life insurance app in the United States.

As it stands, the application allows users to provide personal and coverage information through natural language prompts and receive tailored insurance options within minutes. Customers then continue the process through MyChoice’s existing digital platform to complete their purchase.

The app is designed to complement existing distribution channels — including direct, broker, and aggregator models — by introducing a new entry point for consumers increasingly using AI-powered tools. “It reflects a broader shift toward agent-driven experiences, where early-stage decision-making can begin through conversation before transitioning into structured purchase flows.”

For an auto quote, the app asks for a variety of details, including, among things: postal code, vehicle year/make/model, driver age and gender, licence type, and whether the driver had a licence before anywhere other than Canada or the U.S. It then compares options from multiple insurers and provides an estimated quote.

Leveraging advancements in MCP

The app leverages advancements in Model Context Protocol (MCP) architecture, enabling flexible, model-agnostic integrations and deeper connectivity between conversational interfaces and underwriting workflows, as MyChoice explains.

“Right now, finding these AI capabilities is exactly like the early days of the internet when we relied on web directories before search engines,” says Aren Mirzaian, CEO and co-founder of MyChoice. “But what happens when Google starts natively indexing these MCPs or their own protocol?

“When MCPs are natively indexed, your favourite foundational model will instinctively find and rank the best headless apps to execute a workflow,” he says, referring to an application that separates the front end (what users see) from the back end (which hold data and logic). “In today’s age, where code is commoditized, the winners will be the ones who have the deep quote-to-bind infrastructure, not the pureplay AI tools.

“The front end is just what people are interacting with right now,” Mirzaian adds. “Agentic AI is the new buzzword, but all it really means is an AI interacting with your APIs or using a browser instead of a human interacting with your front end.”

MyChoice says it has been experimenting with conversational insurance interfaces for “quite some time,” having launched a conversational life insurance quoting tool as a custom GPT as early as July 2024. “However, the advent of…MCP has enabled us to create experiences that are truly model-agnostic and to lay the groundwork for deeper funnel penetration with this emerging customer acquisition and engagement channel.”

May 4, 2026
Latest twist in a dispute between insurers that’s almost made it to the Supreme Court…twice

In a priority dispute over an auto accident that happened 20 years ago — a case that’ ha’s already gone to the Supreme Court of Canada and back again — the Court of Appeal for Ontario has provided the latest twist in a flip-flopping legal saga.

In Chubb Insurance Company of Canada v. Zurich Insurance Company, the Ontario Court of Appeal found last week that by not paying out accident benefits first — as required by Ontario’s priority dispute rules — and then by not notifying the second payer within 90 days of a priority dispute claim, Chubb Insurance Company of Canada is on the hook to pay for the entire amount of the claimant’s benefits permanently.

The upshot is that Chubb has to pay Zurich Canada almost $1 million to reimburse Zurich for accident benefits it paid to a catastrophically impaired claimant.

Background

Sukhvinder Singh was in an accident while driving a rental car in 2006. No other vehicle was involved. She did not report the crash to the car rental agency.

The rental vehicle at Wheels 4 Rent was insured by Zurich, which Singh did not know.

At the time, Singh believed Chubb was the insurer, and her lawyer contacted Chubb to confirm coverage. Chubb also issued a policy to the rental agency that provided optional accidental death and dismemberment insurance. Singh did not purchase Chubb’s optional coverage.

After experiencing symptoms following her crash, Singh applied for accident benefits from Chubb, thinking she had seen Chubb’s name somewhere at the rental vehicle site. On Nov. 21, 2006, Chubb denied her application, stating: “This is not a personal automobile policy and thus the coverage of Ontario Statutory Accident Benefits does not apply.”

More than a year and a half later, on May 28, 2008, Chubb advised Singh’s lawyer that Zurich was Wheels 4 Rent’s auto insurer. Once Zurich became aware of the claim, it agreed to adjust it, pending the outcome of its priority dispute with Chubb.

Also in the news: Why AI won’t replace human claims adjusters

The case reached the Supreme Court, where Chubb argued the link between Singh and Chubb was not strong enough for Chubb to be considered an ‘insurer,’ as defined in the province’s Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. But the Supreme Court found there was a sufficient connection between Singh and Chubb, since Chubb was an optional benefits insurer and Singh probably knew about this because of something she saw at the rental agency. Chubb was therefore ruled an ‘insurer’ under the priority dispute rules.

Chubb then assumed carriage of the claim, chose to settle out with Ms. Singh (for more than the near-$1 million already paid out on the claim). Chubb then said that the SCC decision did not address all of the issues that were originally before the arbitrator, and thus, the matter needed to go back.

The original arbitrator, Stan Tessis, had passed away and so the court appointed a new arbitrator, Douglas Cunningham. Among other things, he was asked to resolve the issue of whether there wa a deflection of Singh’s claim, and if so, by who, and with what repercussions.

The arbitrator’s decision then flip-flopped its way back up to the Court of Appeal for Ontario. This time, the dispute was over which insurer was responsible for the amount Zurich paid out to Singh once it became aware of the claim. Zurich paid out $$998,387 to Singh, whose claim by then was deemed a catastrophic injury.

An arbitrator ruled Chubb had to reimburse Zurich for the total amount, since Chubb was the first payor and it did not give Zurich the required 90-day notice of a priority dispute. But on appeal, Ontario’s Superior Court ruled both Chubb and Zurich had to split responsibility for the payment.

Ontario’s Court of Appeal overturned that decision, finding Chubb owed the full amount.

“When Chubb received the claim, it simply refused to pay; it made no efforts to identify Zurich as an insurer,” a unanimous three-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal found. “Given that Chubb had a relationship with Wheels 4 Rent, it would have been easy for Chubb to identify and notify Zurich as the correct insurer.

“Instead, Chubb waited a year and a half to provide this information to Ms. Singh. By this point, Ms. Singh was left without benefits and her condition had seriously worsened. In addition, given the delay, Zurich was not able to investigate and adjust the claim in a timely way.

“Section 2 of the [priority dispute regulations] is designed to guard against the type of harm Ms. Singh experienced; the provision is meant to ensure that disputes between insurers do not interfere with the prompt payment of claims to people who were injured in motor vehicle accidents.

“Section 3 is designed to guard against the prejudice Chubb’s delay in notifying Zurich caused; the insurer who is ultimately responsible for paying a claim should have a chance to investigate as soon as possible after the accident to adjust the claim and assess its risk.

“Given the circumstances of this case, the second arbitrator made no errors in exercising his discretion to require Chubb to pay the full amount of benefits owed to Ms. Singh permanently.”

Editor’s Note: The story has been updated to correct the original reporting, which inaccurately stated the Supreme Court had sent the matter back to arbitration. In fact, Chubb found the Supreme Court did not address matters that needed further arbitration. CU apologizes for the error.

May 4, 2026