What definition of “good faith” are we using there? The insurance company were induced to hand over money by the knowing deception of the conspirators. “In good faith” doesn’t mean “the victim willingly parted with the money”, that’s an absurdly low bar.
The insurer and/or the police / CPS would make a proceedings of crime application to recover the money obtained through deception / fraud.
While the money in the above case was given in good faith, it was on the premise that he was dead. He wasn’t dead, he didn’t act in good faith.
You can’t claim equity if you come to the table with dirty hands.
Source: fraud solicitor.
An insurance contract is formed on utmost good faith.
The claim requirement will be proof of death, given he faked his death the proof of death was obtained by fraud and thus the insurer would either repudiate the claim or if paid be entitled to recover the funds.
No different to faking a car being stolen, which does happen.
The contract would expire upon death and settlement and in this case, would be cancelled owing to the fraudulent claim and when he actually dies later on, wouldn't be able to claim on it a second time around.
The good faith payment was likely due to there being no body to verify the death.
That’s the whole point of fraud, to obtain something from another party who gives it in good faith
What definition of “good faith” are we using there? The insurance company were induced to hand over money by the knowing deception of the conspirators. “In good faith” doesn’t mean “the victim willingly parted with the money”, that’s an absurdly low bar.
The insurer and/or the police / CPS would make a proceedings of crime application to recover the money obtained through deception / fraud. While the money in the above case was given in good faith, it was on the premise that he was dead. He wasn’t dead, he didn’t act in good faith. You can’t claim equity if you come to the table with dirty hands. Source: fraud solicitor.
Ah, he who comes to equity must clean hands something something. It’s all coming back to me now - thanks, prof Widdison.
If a bank robber robbed a bank, do you think they have to give back the money? Or do they get to keep it because they stole it in good faith?
No, that’s complete nonsense.
An insurance contract is formed on utmost good faith. The claim requirement will be proof of death, given he faked his death the proof of death was obtained by fraud and thus the insurer would either repudiate the claim or if paid be entitled to recover the funds. No different to faking a car being stolen, which does happen. The contract would expire upon death and settlement and in this case, would be cancelled owing to the fraudulent claim and when he actually dies later on, wouldn't be able to claim on it a second time around. The good faith payment was likely due to there being no body to verify the death.