What a Landmark BC Case Teaches Us About E&O Documentation
Let’s be real for a second. Every insurance broker in British Columbia is just one bad afternoon away from having to defend a massive negligence claim. In an era of shifting legal landscapes and tightening exclusions, the margin for error has never been thinner.
A client trusts you for years. You have hundreds of casual phone calls, quick emails, and standard renewals. But if an uninsured loss occurs, who does the court believe when there’s no paper trail?
Fortunately, we have a recent, real-world case that gives us the exact blueprint for what a bulletproof defence looks like.
The Battle of Recall: Carriere de Davide v. Westland Insurance Group Ltd.
The Case: Carriere-de-Davide v. Westland Insurance Group Ltd.
In the landmark B.C. Supreme Court case Carriere de Davide v. Westland Insurance Group Ltd., a long-time client sued his retail broker after a serious motor vehicle accident left him without Excess Underinsured Motorist Protection.
The Allegation: Failure to Explain Excess UMP Coverage
The client’s argument was simple: “The brokerage never properly advised me of what I was giving up.”
The Evidence: 16 Previous Coverage Refusals
Here is the twist: The client had declined this specific coverage sixteen separate times over sixteen consecutive years.
The Outcome: The Brokerage Wins at Trial and on Appeal
Because the brokerage had meticulously documented every single refusal, year after year, their files held up under the intense scrutiny of the B.C. Supreme Court. The broker won. But the case serves as a chilling reminder: the exact same facts, with just one missing note in the file, could have easily gone the other way.
What did the Carriere-de-Davide v. Westland Insurance case establish?
The British Columbia Supreme Court and Court of Appeal dismissed an insurance negligence claim against Westland Insurance Group after finding that the brokerage had fulfilled its duty to offer and explain optional Excess Underinsured Motorist Protection (UMP) coverage. The client had declined the coverage across 16 previous insurance transactions, and evidence of the broker’s established procedures and the client’s documented decisions supported the brokerage’s defence. The case highlights the importance of consistent client communication, documented coverage decisions, and repeatable brokerage procedures in managing E&O risk.
Five Documentation Practices Every Insurance Brokerage Should Follow
- Document every discussion of optional coverage.
- Record when a client declines a recommendation or coverage option.
- Capture the client’s decision in a consistent, accessible format.
- Use standardized procedures to ensure important discussions aren’t missed.
- Review documentation practices regularly and train staff on them.
The B.C. Threat Matrix: Why Brokers Are More Exposed in 2026
This allegation of negligence against the broker might have been predictable. British Columbia has become a notoriously plaintiff-friendly operating environment, driven by several converging forces:
- The ICBC No-Fault Vacuum: Since ICBC transitioned to the “Enhanced Care” no-fault model in 2021, the ability to sue for basic auto damages was essentially removed. This created an immediate vacuum in the legal market. Personal injury lawyers, looking for new avenues of recovery, have aggressively redirected their focus toward professional liability claims against insurance brokers.
- The “Someone Should Pay” Culture: We are living in a societal *blame culture* where the public expects compensation for any injury or loss, regardless of actual fault. When a claim is denied, the broker is the first target.
- Reputational Velocity: In 2026, an unproven allegation or a disciplinary decision can go viral on social media instantly, damaging your brokerage’s reputation long before you ever get to court.
Remember: negligence is rarely intentional. Human error remains the primary driver of E&O claims. Brokerages don’t lose these lawsuits because they acted in bad faith; they lose because they cannot prove, years after the fact, that they did their jobs correctly.
Turn Real-World E&O Cases into Better Brokerage Practices
Understanding your professional obligations is one thing. Making sure every member of your team applies them consistently is another.
ProForm Risk Academy helps bridge that gap.
Exclusive and free for ProForm clients, this CE-accredited online learning program uses real insurance E&O legal decisions to help brokerage teams understand their responsibilities and develop stronger day-to-day practices.
Across 14 comprehensive modules, your team explores the real-world consequences of coverage gaps, inadequate documentation, missed disclosures, and failures in client communication.
The goal is simple: turn legal lessons into practical habits that help protect your clients, your brokerage, and your professional reputation.
Building Your Defence: ProForm Risk Academy
How do you turn this E&O vulnerability into your brokerage’s greatest strength? You do it by transforming “Duty of Care awareness” from a high-level concept into an everyday, client-facing habit.
That is why we launched ProForm Risk Academy. Exclusive and completely free for ProForm clients, this CE-accredited online learning curriculum uses settled E&O legal cases as a storytelling vehicle to train frontline staff on establishing sound, court-tested workflows.
Across 14 comprehensive modules, your team will dive deep into real-world legal rulings to build bulletproof documentation habits:
- Module 1: Fine’s Flowers v. General Accident – Establishing what “full coverage” legally obligates a broker to do.
- Module 2: Carriere de Davide v. Westland – A deep dive into the B.C. case and the documentation habit that decided it.
- Module 3: Bronfman v. BFL Canada – How failing to flag high-value coverage gaps can lead directly to broker liability.
- Module 4: Colangelo v. York Fire – Understanding how proper equipment scheduling protects brokers.
- Module 5: 2049390 Ontario Inc. v. Leung – How consistent documentation of recommendations wins E&O cases.
- Module 6: Pelletier v. Assurances de L’Est – The risks of improper policy cancellation and following instructions.
- Module 7: Beck Estate v. Johnston Meier – Why brokers must flag exclusions when a client’s life circumstances change.
- Module 8: Fletcher v. Manitoba Public Insurance – Understanding how public insurers face the same Duty of Care.
- Module 9: CIA Inspection v. Dan Lawrie – Why a broker remains liable for the actions of an MGA on their behalf.
- Module 10: McIntosh v. RSA – Proving causation: why a Duty of Care failure alone isn’t enough.
- Module 11: Multi Foods v. Kent Line – The dangers of failing to flag optional coverage extensions.
- Module 12: Cosyns v. Smith – Comparing contract vs. negligence and utilizing contributory negligence.
- Module 13: Keizer v. Founders – Managing the non-negotiable duty of full disclosure to the insurer.
- Module 14: National Crane v. Aon – Why a broker’s duty extends to foreseeing operational risks, not just placing policies.
Building a Culture of Credibility
Credibility wins lawsuits, and that credibility is built through consistent practices, complete documentation, and company-wide processes. Don’t wait for a denial letter to find out where your files are weak.
See It Before You Sign Up
Want a walkthrough of Risk Academy for your management or team? Let’s set up an in-office demonstration.
Please contact:
Michelle Loupret
Chief Operating Officer
Phone: 604-910-0695
Email: michelle@proforminsurance.com
About the Author
Michelle Loupret is a brokers E&O expert with over 20 years of experience in the commercial insurance industry. With a deep understanding of the unique challenges faced by insurance brokers, she has honed her skills in account management, administration, broking, wholesaling, project leadership, product development, and underwriting. She is passionate about helping Canadian brokerages build the practical defences they need to thrive in a complex legal market.
