No repairing home or insured-insurer relationship
April 17, 2025
An insured homeowner’s complaints about the handling of her claim did not rise to bad faith.
Insurance law – Homeowner’s insurance – Actual cash value – Bad faith – Practice – Appeals – Duties and liabilities of insured
Linde v. Max Insurance Co., [2025] M.J. No. 44, Manitoba Court of Appeal, February 11, 2025, C.J. Mainella, J.L. Lemaistre and A.M.E. Turner JJ.A.
An insured appealed the dismissal of her bad faith claim against her home insurer, relating to the insurer’s handling of a claim for fire damage. The policy provided for repair/replacement costs or actual cash value if the plaintiff repaired or replaced the building in the same location. The insurer paid actual cash value for the house and contents, as the insured neither repaired nor replaced the building, instead purchasing a different property. The trial judge found that the insurer did not act in bad faith, and that the insured was not going to accept the insurer’s decision that her house could be repaired.
On appeal, the court noted that whether the insurer acted in bad faith was a question of mixed fact and law. The insured argued that several of the insurer’s actions constituted bad faith, including the insurer providing a Schedule of Loss beyond the statutory time limit, refusing to provide photos of contents to the insured, refusing to pay out the insured’s mortgage on a timely basis, and instructing an appraiser to use a depreciation value. The insured also argued that the insurer’s decision that her house was repairable was evidence of bad faith. However, the insured failed to establish that the conduct of the insurer rose to the threshold required to establish bad faith, and the appeal was dismissed.
This case was digested by Joe Antifaev and edited by Steven W. Abramson of Harper Grey LLP and first published in the LexisNexis® Harper Grey Insurance Law Netletter and the Harper Grey Insurance Law Newsletter. If you would like to discuss this case further, please feel free to contact them directly at [email protected] or [email protected].
Important Notice: The information contained in this Article is intended for general information purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. It is not intended as legal advice from Harper Grey LLP or the individual author(s), nor intended as a substitute for legal advice on any specific subject matter. Detailed legal counsel should be sought prior to undertaking any legal matter. The information contained in this Article is current to the last update and may change. Last Update: April 17, 2025.
Related
Subscribe