Is this grounds for termination?
Is this grounds for termination?
"Someone broke my car window and stole the car radio and my laptop. I reported the loss to my household insurance company and was reimbursed CHF 2,156. I was then the victim of another theft. This time, instead of reimbursing me, my insurance company cancelled my policy and demanded that I pay back the CHF 2,156 on the grounds that when I signed the policy I had not indicated that I had caused a car accident for which my civil liability insurance had been paid!
Berthe, Geneva
The Law on insurance contracts stipulates that the person wishing to take out insurance must declare, when the contract is concluded, all the facts that are important for assessing the risk, as they are or should be known to him. All facts likely to influence the insurer's decision to conclude the contract or the conditions governing it are considered important.
Answers must be given in writing, generally following a questionnaire or in response to questions formulated in writing by the insurer. On the other hand, the future insured does not have to inform the insurer of facts about which he has not been questioned. In the event of a false, inaccurate or incomplete response to one or more precise and unequivocal questions, the policyholder is guilty of "reticence". Failure to inform the insurer of important new facts also constitutes concealment.
In the event of concealment, the insurer is entitled to cancel the insurance contract within four weeks of becoming aware of the omission or misrepresentation. On the other hand, it may demand reimbursement of claims relating to a previous claim, provided that there is a causal link between the fact not declared when the contract was concluded and the subsequent claim. The Federal Court denied the existence of such a link in a case where an insurer refused to compensate its policyholder whose car had been damaged on the grounds that the policyholder had failed to disclose a previous conviction for drink-driving.
In this case, if the questionnaire submitted to you by your insurer contained a question about your previous claims, and you did in fact show reluctance, then the cancellation of your policy is in accordance with the law if you were notified of it in writing within 4 weeks. However, it is doubtful whether your failure to report an accident was in any way connected with the theft you subsequently suffered. Consequently, your insurer cannot demand reimbursement of the benefit paid.
