Question 9

The insurer is NOT liable for any losses incurred while the policy owner was attempting to commit a felony.

This provision clearly states that the insurer's liability is negated if the policy owner is involved in illegal activities, specifically attempting to commit a felony.

A) under the influence of prescription drugs

This option does not directly relate to the illegal occupation provision. While being under the influence could affect a person's actions, it does not inherently imply that the policy owner is committing a felony or engaging in illegal occupation, which is the critical factor for liability exclusion.

B) attempting to commit a felony

This is the correct answer, as the illegal occupation provision explicitly states that the insurer is not liable for any losses incurred under such circumstances. Engaging in criminal activity, such as attempting to commit a felony, directly impacts the insurer's responsibility.

C) pursuing a criminal

Pursuing a criminal typically does not fall under the illegal occupation provision, as this action does not imply wrongdoing on the part of the policy owner. Instead, it suggests that the policy owner may be acting in a protective or lawful capacity, which would not trigger the liability exclusion.

D) not at work

This option is irrelevant to the illegal occupation provision. Being not at work does not imply any illegal activity or occupation that would lead to a loss of insurer liability. Therefore, it does not meet the criteria outlined in the provision.

Conclusion

The illegal occupation provision is specifically designed to exclude liability when the policy owner is engaging in illegal activities, such as attempting to commit a felony. Options A, C, and D fail to meet this criterion, as they do not imply illegal actions. Thus, Option B is definitively the only correct choice that aligns with the insurer's liability exclusions.