Animal Advocates Watchdog

Insurance companies are becoming less willing to risk potential lawsuits related to dog bites.

http://www.canada.com/victoria/timescolonist/story.asp?id=3A6DC975-7C0B-4C23-AB25-4E2912567260

Friday, March 26, 2004

An Alberta homeowner denied house insurance because of the dog he owns is a warning bell for Canadians to check their policies, David Keen, president of the Insurance Broker's Association of B.C., said Thursday.

Dog-owners should be prudent, he said. If they own a breed that has a reputation attached, "it is probably a wise thing to do to tell your insurance company that you do have the dog, just to be on the safe side," Keen said.

And if you own a dog that has bitten in the past, that is material information that should be shared with the insurance company, he said.

Emmanuel Gionet of Calgary received a registered letter from Allstate insurance company this week informing him his policy won't be renewed when it expires next month. "The policy no longer meets our underwriting guidelines due to unacceptable dog breeds in the household," the letter said.

Gionet's dogs are both mutts from the SPCA, including one with some Rottweiler and a German shepherd-lab cross. He said he told Allstate about them after he had to change his policy when he moved and they asked if he had a security system. He replied that his dogs were his security system. Ironically, he has found insurance with a small Alberta company that gave him a discount because the dogs would deter would-be burglars.

Louise Bremness, spokeswoman for the Insurance Bureau of Canada, doesn't know how widespread the move has become in the industry.

She said insurance companies are becoming less willing to risk potential lawsuits related to dog bites. "I guess an insurance company has every right to decide whether they want to expose themselves to a dangerous animal," Bremness said.

Dog attacks are becoming more common. On Monday, a Victoria man's seeing-eye dog was set upon by a pair of pit bulls. The yellow Labrador had extensive surgery to close wounds. Its visually impaired owner was not physically harmed, but had to fight with the attackers to free his dog.

A representative at an Edmonton Allstate office said somebody who has a family dog is unlikely to be refused homeowner's insurance, but the company thinks there can be problems with multiple dogs of the same breed. The policy came into effect late last year.

It's a good possibility that more insurance companies will get tougher on insurance coverage for dog owners if more dog attacks occur, Keen said.

At Island Pacific Insurance Brokers on Quadra Street, manager Dawn Bowden said that if it is known to them that a certain breed of dog is in a home, then a homeowner policy will exclude liability coverage for claims from that animal. "We've got a couple of them now."

Bob Lane, of Bob Lane Insurance Services of Sooke Road, has not dealt with any insurance companies which ask homeowners about their dogs. "I expect that is going to come though," Lane said, adding he expects certain breeds would be singled out.

Keen said anyone breeding dogs and selling puppies should declare that to their insurance company to ensure they are properly covered. That's because homeowner insurance is not meant to cover a home-based business, such as selling dogs. Selling dogs involves a business liability and can void a homeowner's policy.

Messages In This Thread

Pit bulls attack seeing-eye dog in Victoria
Re: Pit bulls attack seeing-eye dog in Victoria
The woman who has the dog....
Pit Bull attacks young Golden Retriever at Vancouver off leash park and then the City pound returns the pit bull to the owner!
Reaction to attack on Golden Retriever by Pit Bull defender is regretably typical
Another pit bull attacks, but gets to go home
Guide Dog On The Mend *LINK* *PIC*
Owners of certain dog breeds may have trouble getting home insurance
Funny thing is...
Spurious argument number one against breed specific controls: Small breeds are just as dangerous as protection/fighting breeds
Spurious argument number five against breed specific controls: Get the dog's owner to carry extra liability insurance
Spurious argument number two against breed specific controls: We just have to make people behave responsibly
Spurious argument number three against breed specific controls: Ban the deed, not the breed
Spurious argument number four against breed specific controls: The "slippery slope" argument
Re: Spurious argument number four against breed specific controls: The "slippery slope" argument
Market corrections are going to take this issue out of the hands of power breed defenders and weak-kneed politicians
Child victims of dog attacks do not die quickly
Dog Bite Law: Severe injuries occur almost exclusively in children less than 10 years of age *LINK*
Pit bulls and Rottweilers 5% in population, 50% of fatal attacks
Victoria: Tougher laws, steeper fines designed to make owners of vicious dogs accountable for actions
Insurance companies are becoming less willing to risk potential lawsuits related to dog bites.
If there has been consideration of holding parents responsible for their children's actions, why are pet owners not?
Sun & Province Letters to the Editor March 26/04
These people are metaphorically throwing children to the wolves
Victoria could add teeth to dog bylaws

Share