Do Insurance Companies Use Surveillance in Long-Term Disability Claims in Ontario?
- 11 minutes ago
- 3 min read
By Lane Foster, Personal Injury Lawyer
Insurance companies may use surveillance in long-term disability (LTD) claims in Ontario. This can include video surveillance, social media monitoring, or other investigative methods to assess whether a person’s reported limitations are consistent with their observed activities.
Do Insurance Companies Use Surveillance in LTD Claims?
Yes. Some disability insurers use surveillance as part of the claims process, particularly where:
the claim has been ongoing
there are questions about functional limitations
the insurer believes the medical evidence is unclear
Surveillance is not used in every case, but it is a recognized method of investigation in certain claims. Surveillance issues can arise in disputes involving insurers such as Sun Life Financial, Manulife, Canada Life, and RBC, particularly where benefits are being reassessed or challenged.
How Do Insurance Companies Use Surveillance?
Insurance companies may use surveillance to gather information about a claimant’s daily activities.
This can include:
observing physical activity
documenting movement and behaviour
reviewing publicly available online content
The goal is typically to compare observed activity with reported limitations.
What Types of Surveillance Are Used in Disability Claims?
Video Surveillance
Investigators may record:
walking, driving, or lifting
time spent outside the home
patterns of activity over several days
Social Media Monitoring
Insurers may review:
public social media posts
photos or videos
online activity that appears inconsistent with reported limitations
Activity and Background Review
This may include:
return-to-work activity
business or employment involvement
other activities relevant to work capacity
When Do Insurance Companies Use Surveillance?
Surveillance is more likely where:
benefits have been paid for a period of time
a claim is being reassessed
there are concerns about consistency
limitations are difficult to measure objectively
In some cases, surveillance occurs without the claimant being aware.
Can Surveillance Be Used to Deny Long-Term Disability Benefits?
Yes. Insurers may rely on surveillance to argue that:
a person is capable of working
reported limitations are overstated
observed activity is inconsistent with disability
However, surveillance is usually only one part of the overall assessment.
Does Surveillance Automatically Mean a Claim Will Be Denied?
No. Surveillance does not determine the outcome of a claim on its own.
In many cases:
the activity observed is limited
the footage does not reflect recovery time or pain
the activity is consistent with the person’s condition
Short video clips may not accurately represent overall functional ability.
How Is Surveillance Interpreted in LTD Claims?
Surveillance is often interpreted in a way that emphasizes activity rather than context. For example:
brief activity may be presented as sustained capacity
isolated events may be treated as typical behaviour
normal daily activities may be viewed as inconsistent with disability
Disputes often arise over how surveillance is interpreted compared to medical evidence.
What Should You Do If You Think You Are Being Watched by an Insurance Company?
Generally, it is best to:
continue normal daily activities
follow medical advice
avoid changing behaviour
Trying to alter behaviour can sometimes create inconsistencies that complicate a
claim.
How Surveillance Fits Into a Long-Term Disability Claim
Surveillance is only one factor in assessing a claim. Surveillance is only one factor in assessing a claim. For a broader overview, see our Ontario long-term disability lawyers page. Insurers also consider:
medical evidence
functional limitations
policy definitions of disability
vocational factors
The central issue remains whether the evidence supports an inability to work.
Final Thoughts
Insurance companies do use surveillance in some long-term disability claims in Ontario. While it can affect how a claim is assessed, it does not determine the outcome on its own.
The key issue is whether the available evidence supports the claim under the terms of the policy.
