Truck owners prevail after 2018 twister sent them down long, twisted road with MPI

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 25/07/2023 (827 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It was a whirlwind court ruling.

A Manitoba Court of King’s Bench judge has ruled a couple whose 2009 Dodge Ram truck was destroyed in a 2018 tornado are entitled to a payout from Manitoba Public Insurance, after the Crown corporation denied coverage.

In a July 14 judgment, Justice Candace Grammond said Nadine Dawne Cabak Ralph is entitled to $24,350 from the public insurer for her total loss of the truck in August 2018.

MPI had denied coverage for the tornado-destroyed vehicle, arguing an improper plate that did not comply with legislation had been affixed to the truck on Aug. 3, 2018.

The EF4 tornado — the strongest recorded in North America that year, according to the Weather Network — touched ground near Alonsa that day, with winds up to 280 km/h. A 77-year-old farmer and retired teacher, Jack Furrie, was killed when his home was destroyed in the twister.

William Frank Ralph, who sold vehicles, had a dealer plate on the truck, which his wife Nadine bought from him in May 2017.

The husband then listed the vehicle for sale, on consignment from his wife, in the fall of 2017, but it did not sell. The dealer plate remained affixed.

On July 27, 2018, the couple drove to a family farm to attend a reunion, remaining there until the Aug. 3, tornado.

In its arguments, MPI noted that a vehicle with a dealer plate must be kept for sale, be used in the promotion of sales, or be in the dealer’s custody for testing or servicing or being moved for testing or servicing.

The question in front of Grammond was whether the destroyed truck complied with any of those options.

MPI argued the truck did not, at the time — that the couple were using the since-destroyed truck for personal reasons — but the Ralph and his wife argued that because he had used the truck to tow a trailer to the farm that June, which he posted for sale, it was a valid use of the plate.

William Ralph testified that one of the reasons the couple drove the vehicle to the farm was to tow the trailer to Winnipeg, because he had received an interest from a prospective buyer.

Grammond accepted that the plaintiffs intended to use the truck to tow the trailer back to Mr. Ralph’s business in East Selkirk.

“Certainly, this use of the plate was for a business-related purpose, and I am satisfied that it was ‘in the promotion of sales,’ although I recognize that the sale being promoted was that of the trailer and not of the truck,” the judge wrote, in finding for the Ralphs in the lawsuit.

She made no order on court costs, which the Ralphs had sought, and did not grant the lost profits, loss of income and towing and storage costs the plaintiffs sought.

erik.pindera@freepress.mb.ca