Kitchener man claimed total disability, but insurance surveillance revealed otherwise

A Kitchener man claimed he was totally disabled and entitled to longterm disability benefits. But covert video surveillance by an insurance company caught him “walking, bending, sitting and generally carrying on with his daily activities without assistance,” court was told.

The man, now 32, began working at Camtac Manufacturing in Guelph in 2017. He went on shortterm disability the following year after getting injured on the job. Back pain, he alleged, prevented him from working.

The man later claimed he was totally disabled.

In April 2019, the Manufacturers Life Insurance Co. terminated payments after concluding he was not totally disabled, according to a court ruling last week.

In Superior Court in Kitchener, the man sought a “declaration of entitlement” to long-term disability benefits “on an indefinite basis.” He later limited his claim to benefits from August 2019 to October 2021, about $50,000.

The man did not know that Manufacturers Life had put him under video surveillance, which spanned many days from 2019 to 2022, court was told. Surveillance revealed the man was not completely disabled and actually worked at another company at one point.

Video showed him “standing, walking, bending, sitting and generally carrying on with his daily activities without assistance,” said Justice Michael Valente.

He was also captured on video pumping gas, driving, and drinking a beverage on a Tim Hortons patio.

“In my opinion, it is very clear from the surveillance videotapes that the plaintiff was capable of doing much more than he was reporting both to (Manufacturers Life) and his treating physicians,” the judge said.

In May 2022, the man drove to Court Galvanizing, a Cambridge factory, and went in the employee entrance at 11 p.m. When he left eight hours later, he fist-bumped other men leaving the factory. The man denied working there. “Instead, he testified that he was merely picking up an individual whom he described as a ‘friend,’ a ‘high level friend’ and an ‘in-law’ whose name he could not recall,” the judge said.

“He also testified that although he may have fist-bumped certain men exiting the Court Galvanizing facility, he did not know them. I find the plaintiff’s explanation for his activities on that early morning of May 2022 to be incredulous and to undermine his credibility. It is plain and obvious that in May 2022 that the plaintiff worked at Court Galvanizing.”

Valente noted that in the summer of 2020, when the man claimed back and leg pain prevented him from returning to work, he was well enough to consider travelling overseas to visit his ailing mother.

“The physical demands of overseas travel require protracted standing, walking, and sitting, as well as bending and lifting,” the judge said.

“These are the very same work activities that the plaintiff claimed he was unable to do. In my opinion, the plaintiff’s willingness to undertake these activities for purposes of travel is inconsistent with his position that he was otherwise totally disabled.”

The judge ruled medical evidence “does not support a finding of total disability” and rejected the man’s claim.

Surveillance video showed the man ‘standing, walking, bending, sitting and generally carrying on with his daily activities without assistance’