Claimant Loses UDAP Fee Dispute Against Insurer
📌 In brief
In a recent case heard by the Civil Resolution Tribunal, a claimant sought a refund of a UDAP fee from an insurer. The claimant argued the fee was improperly charged. However, the Tribunal found the claimant did not provide sufficient proof that the fee was incorrect, leading to the dismissal of the claim.
⚖️ Legal holding
An owner is responsible for paying the Unlisted Driver Accident Premium if an unlisted driver causing an accident is a member of the principal driver's household.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant failed to prove that the respondent improperly charged a UDAP fee.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The unlisted driver's past and current insurance policies listed the principal driver's Burnaby address.
- The unlisted driver's current driver's license lists the principal driver's Burnaby address.
- The principal driver told the claims adjuster that he and the unlisted driver lived in the same household.
- The applicant did not deny telling the insurer that he and the unlisted driver lived together.
- The unlisted driver was a member of the principal driver's household at the time of the accident.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision dismissed the claimant's request for a refund of the UDAP fee.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the claimant was entitled to a refund of a UDAP fee paid to the respondent.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided against the claimant, stating that the claimant failed to prove the UDAP fee was improperly charged.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were cited in the decision.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was the claimant's failure to provide sufficient evidence that the unlisted driver was not a member of the household at the time of the accident.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, it means they need to provide strong evidence to prove that the UDAP fee was improperly charged.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence that mattered included the claimant's insurance policies, the unlisted driver's insurance policies, and the driver's license addresses.