BC Credit

Question 1

What Economical had not done sufficiently?

Answer 1

Not adequately informed a PH that credit information could be collected for the purpose of UW

Question 2

What type of form was the concerning policy written on?

Answer 2

• When he applied, in 2003, he used a standard form that included a statement that the applicants “agree that reports containing credit or claims history may be sought”
• Form was created in 1996 and has since been updated

Question 3

What event led to the complaint/case?

Answer 3

In 2008, Hughes’s home was burglarized and a claim settled. Later, Hughes learnt that Economical had sought his credit score prior to renewing his policy. Complained to the provincial IPC that Economical had breached his privacy

Question 4

What Act was reviewed to determine the nature of Economical’s misconduct? What did it state?

Answer 4

• In 2011, IPC appointed a delegate to conduct an inquiry
• Province’s Personal Information Protection Act (2004):
“An organization must not collect personal info unless it has the express or implied consent of the individual”

Question 5

Economical ordered to fulfill two main obligations/tasks

Answer 5

• Provide all home insurance PH who have not been provided with adequate notice, and all future applicants for home insurance, that their credit score may be obtained for the purpose of assessing future risk of loss
• Review consents it has obtained from home insurance PH since privacy law in 2004 and ascertain that individuals have received proper notice

Question 6

Goepel set aside orders against Economical - What was instead required of them?

Answer 6

• Provide all new applicant to be given notices explaining how Economical collects and use personal information
• Send a copy of the notice to all Economical’s British Columbia PH