Printable Format40-411. Notice of intention to cancel policy for nonpayment of premium; time for payment. Before any such cancellation or forfeiture can be made for the non-payment of any such premium the insurance company shall notify the policyowner of any such policy that the premium thereon, stating the amount thereof, is due and unpaid, and of its intention to forfeit or cancel the same, and such policyowner shall have the right, at any time within thirty (30) days after such notice has been duly deposited in the post office, postage prepaid, and addressed to such policyowner to the address last known by such company, to pay such premium: Provided, That in lieu of the notice hereinbefore provided, in the case of policies providing for a period of grace of not less than thirty (30) days, or one month, for the payment of premiums and containing any provision for cancellation or forfeiture in case of nonpayment of premiums at the end of such period, the insurance company may, not more than thirty (30) days prior to the date specified in such policy when any premium will become due and payable without grace, in like manner notify the policyowner under any such policy, of the date when such premium will fall due, stating the amount thereof, and its intention to forfeit or cancel the same if such premium be not paid within the period of grace provided in the policy; and any attempt on the part of such insurance company, within six (6) months after default in the payment of any premium, to cancel or forfeit any such policy without the notice herein provided shall be null and void. The affidavit of any responsible officer, clerk or agent of the corporation authorized to mail such notice, that the notice required by this section has been duly addressed and mailed by the corporation issuing such policy shall be prima facie evidence that such notice has been duly given.
History: L. 1927, ch. 231, 40-411; L. 1959, ch. 214, § 2; June 30.
Source or prior law:
L. 1913, ch. 212, § 2; R.S. 1923, 40-333; L. 1925, ch. 184, § 2.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
1953-55 survey of insurance law, Richard A. Barber, 4 K.L.R. 209, 211, 212 (1955).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Statute not retroactive; applicability to Nebraska policy considered. Lightner v. Insurance Co., 97 Kan. 97, 101, 102, 154 P. 227.
2. Provision in policy waiving statutory written notice held void. Reynolds v. Insurance Co., 105 Kan. 669, 672, 185 P. 1051.
3. Extension premium note in default; notice of intended forfeiture necessary. Cunningham v. Insurance Co., 106 Kan. 631, 632, 189 P. 158.
4. Notice of intention to cancel given 32 days after time of payment valid. Wolford, Administratrix, v. Insurance Co., 114 Kan. 411, 413, 219 P. 263.
5. Section not applicable to policy for short period with fixed termination. Balch v. Life Insurance Co., 116 Kan. 560, 563, 227 P. 326.
6. Notice of forfeiture after extension note in default not prematurely given. Clover v. Bankers Life Co., 117 Kan. 683, 684, 232 P. 1068.
7. Notice of intention to cancel and affidavit conform with statute. Sanders v. Bank Savings Life Ins. Co., 118 Kan. 120, 233 P. 1017.
8. Notice of cancellation for nonpayment goes to insured, not beneficiary. Ziegler v. Kansas Life Ins. Co., 120 Kan. 252, 243 P. 272.
9. Section cited in considering forfeiture of policy. Bank Savings Life Ins. Co. v. Baker, 120 Kan. 756, 244 P. 862.
10. Premium note modifying policy is governed by law of state where made. Wilson v. Illinois Life Ins. Co., 221 Mo. App. 1007, 300 S.W. 550, 552.
11. Notice of forfeiture served during grace period held insufficient. Sebal v. Columbian Nat. Life Ins. Co., 144 Kan. 266, 268, 58 P.2d 1108.
12. Notice mailed November 29, of forfeiture of policy dated October 28, not premature. Swayze v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 32 F.2d 784.
13. Forfeiture cannot be had on notice given during grace period. Wegner v. Federal Reserve Life Ins. Co., 130 Kan. 600, 604, 606, 608, 287 P. 591.
14. Section not applicable to accident policies. Loades v. Woodmen Accident Co., 134 Kan. 337, 338, 5 P.2d 798.
15. Cited in holding proceeds impressed with trust for defrauded party, when. Exchange State Bank v. Poindexter, 137 Kan. 101, 108, 19 P.2d 705.
16. Notice held not to conform with statute and ineffective. Pedersen v. United Life Ins. Co., 139 Kan. 695, 33 P.2d 297.
17. Notice; extension agreement; additional notice not required and policy held lapsed. Brown v. Illinois Bankers Life Assur. Co., 144 Kan. 670, 671, 674, 675, 63 P.2d 165; Hildyard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 145 Kan. 197, 200, 201, 64 P.2d 7.
18. Under policy company could not apply dividends to unpaid premium. Anderson v. Liberty Life Ins. Co., 149 Kan. 447, 448, 87 P.2d 499.
19. Extension agreement made under K.S.A. 40-416 controlling as against provisions hereof. Mauck v. Great American Life Ins. Co., 150 Kan. 636, 638, 640, 95 P.2d 325.
20. Sufficiency of notice under L. 1913, ch. 212, § 2, considered but not determined. Shelton v. United Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 150 Kan. 851, 855, 96 P.2d 675.
21. Notice of cancellation held not to conform to statute and ineffective; provision to cancel policy for nonpayment of premiums must be specific. Logan v. Victory Life Ins. Co., 175 Kan. 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 259 P.2d 165.
22. Section discussed, construed, in holding notice sufficient and policy lapsed. Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Cost, 72 F.2d 519, 520, 522.
23. Notice given prior to due date or within grace period held ineffective. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Ashton, 93 F.2d 565.
24. Annual premium policy not converted by subsequent agreement; notice provisions applicable. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York v. Weigel, 197 F.2d 656, 658.
25. Policy governs as to date premiums due; notice held sufficient. Forbriger v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 9 F. Supp. 94, 95.
26. Purpose of statute requiring life insurance not be terminated for default without notice required by law was not to give insured additional insurance without premium. Miner v. Standard Life and Accident Insurance Co., 451 F.2d 1273, 1274.
27. Statutory notice provisions are part of policy, whether contained in contract or not. Miner v. Standard Life and Accident Insurance Co., 451 F.2d 1273, 1274.
28. Whether insurance contract required plaintiff mail one notice of premium due for each quarterly policy examined. Federal Kemper Life Assur. Co. v. Ellis, 28 F.3d 1033, 1039 (1994).