The Alberta Insurance Council’s General Insurance Council has published a decision wherein the council has fined Camille Scott for creating a fraudulent invoice to support a client’s claim for out-of-pocket expenses.
The client in question suffered a loss when their seed and fertilizer trailer hit a powerline, resulting in the need to make a claim under their various policies.
Scott, the president and CEO of her agency, along with its designated representative (DR), admitted to fabricating a $5,000 invoice for towing and storage fees of the trailer and its contents, saying the insured told her what to put on the invoice. It was ultimately admitted that the business address on the invoice belonged to her parents and that no business existed.
The client meanwhile indicated to investigators that the out-of-pocket expenses were in fact the use of his own staff, equipment and storage. He denied supplying Scott with the information contained in the invoice and denied knowing the business or the address listed. He also denied having a relationship with Scott or her family, while Scott says their families are old friends.
Along the way in different interviews with various investigators and insurance company representatives Scott indicated that the client tricked her. She also stated that she was intimidated by him.
Since the fraudulent invoice has come to light, Scott says the insurer in question has stopped doing business with her entire agency.
“I believed the statements from the insured about the expenses incurred to be truthful. They were plausible and believable in the circumstances,” Scott told the insurance council’s investigators.
The council in turn says the evidence demonstrates that the invoice submitted in support of the client’s claim constitutes a deliberate misrepresentation. “Furthermore, the council notes that the DR is a designated representative,” the decision in the case states.
“While the council acknowledges that the DR has admitted wrongdoing, expressed remorse, and attributed her actions to a desire to assist a longstanding client during a difficult and time sensitive situation, these factors do not outweigh the seriousness of the conduct,” they add. “The deliberate creation and submission of a document that conveyed the appearance of legitimacy is troubling, particularly given the DR’s experience and position of authority.”
The council assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $5,000 – the most it could impose in the case. The council also ordered Scott’s certificate of authority with the agency be suspended for one year.
