Can a life insurance company deny a claim based on the deceased’s occupation or hobby? It happens more than you think.
Life insurance is supposed to provide peace of mind. The policyholder pays premiums in good faith, trusting that if something happens to them, their loved ones will receive the financial support they intended to leave behind. But for many families, the reality is far more complicated. Life insurance companies are in business to make money, and that means they sometimes go to extreme—and even absurd—lengths to avoid paying legitimate claims. If you've received a claim denial letter, especially one that seems unfounded, you’re not alone—and you do have options.
How life insurance companies justify denying valid claims
Life insurers are for-profit corporations. Their profits increase when they deny claims and hold on to premium payments without issuing payouts. During the first two years of a life insurance policy, known as the contestability period, insurers have wide latitude to investigate the policyholder’s background and application responses. If they find anything they can classify as a material misrepresentation, they may attempt to rescind the policy or deny the claim.
Unfortunately, insurers can stretch the concept of misrepresentation to ridiculous extremes. That’s exactly what happened in a recent case we handled involving a client named Toni, whose husband Matt passed away less than a year after securing a $2 million policy. The reason for the denial? The insurer claimed Matt had hidden his involvement in a “dangerous activity.” But the definition of "dangerous" turned out to be entirely subjective—and completely unjustified.
The case: dog breeding mischaracterized as a dangerous activity
Matt and Toni were entrepreneurs who made their living breeding rare and valuable dogs—specifically, white rhino pit bulls. Far from the aggressive stereotype associated with some breeds, Matt and Toni focused on raising gentle, well-socialized dogs that were prized by clients across the country.
As the key figure behind the business, Matt took out a life insurance policy to ensure that Toni would be financially secure if anything ever happened to him. When he applied for coverage, he completed the standard insurance questionnaire, which included this question: “Does the applicant regularly engage in any inherently dangerous activities?” Examples included SCUBA diving, skydiving, and motorcycle racing. Matt truthfully answered “No.”
Ten months after the policy was issued, Matt suffered a fatal heart attack. Toni, still grieving the sudden loss, filed a claim with the insurer. That’s when things took a turn.
A shocking denial letter
Because Matt died within the contestability period, the insurance company initiated an investigation. Toni complied with all requests, including providing Matt’s social media profiles, business documentation, and other records.
Just two months later, she received a denial letter. The insurer claimed that by breeding pit bulls, Matt had engaged in an “inherently dangerous activity” and failed to disclose it. They argued that if they had known about his occupation, they would have never issued the policy. According to the company, the very act of breeding this specific type of dog constituted a risk significant enough to void his coverage.
Toni was devastated—and rightly confused. There had been no mention of dog breeding in the list of dangerous activities. Matt hadn’t lied or omitted any facts. He had simply pursued his passion for animals in a professional, ethical, and humane way.
How we helped overturn the denial
Toni contacted our firm, and we immediately recognized this as a clear case of wrongful denial. While life insurance companies are allowed to investigate claims during the contestability period, they are not allowed to invent new reasons to retroactively classify an insured's truthful answers as deceptive.
We got to work:
Collected national statistics on deaths caused by dog bites (vanishingly rare compared to activities like skydiving or motorcycle racing)
Secured sworn statements from Matt’s clients and colleagues, all of whom described his dogs as gentle, well-trained, and never aggressive
Cited legal precedent showing that unlisted occupations or hobbies that pose no unusual risk cannot be reclassified as “inherently dangerous” after the fact
Prepared a comprehensive appeal and demanded a hearing before the insurer’s internal appeals board
At the hearing, the insurance company had no substantive evidence to support its original denial. They could not prove that Matt’s occupation was inherently dangerous, nor that his answer on the application was false or misleading.
Ultimately, the board reversed the decision and paid out the full $2 million benefit Toni was entitled to receive.
What this case reveals about life insurance companies
This case illustrates how insurers exploit the contestability period to scrutinize every aspect of a policyholder’s life, not necessarily to uncover fraud—but to find any justification to deny payment. When the justification doesn’t exist, they sometimes make one up, assuming the grieving family will simply give up.
That’s why we do what we do. We fight back against wrongful denials. We stand up for families who are being treated unfairly. And we don’t charge our clients a dime unless we recover the money they were promised.
If your claim was denied for a bizarre or questionable reason, don’t walk away. Get legal help.
You may be one appeal away from receiving the financial security your loved one intended for you. Our firm works exclusively in the area of life insurance claim denials. We have a deep understanding of policy language, insurer tactics, and what it takes to win.
We offer free consultations and contingency-based representation, meaning you pay nothing upfront—and nothing at all unless we secure a recovery for you.
FAQ: Life Insurance Denials During the Contestability Period
Can an insurer deny a claim because of a hobby or occupation?
Only if that activity is truly considered “inherently dangerous” and the policyholder misrepresented or omitted it on the application. Insurers cannot redefine “dangerous” after the fact.
What is the contestability period?
It’s usually the first two years of a policy. During this time, insurers can investigate the policyholder’s medical history and application responses to look for material misrepresentations.
Does the insurer have to list specific dangerous activities?
If the application includes examples (e.g., skydiving, SCUBA), it must be clear and unambiguous. Insurers cannot arbitrarily add new categories after the policy is issued.
Is it worth appealing a life insurance claim denial?
Yes. Many denials are successfully reversed on appeal—especially with legal representation. An attorney can help present the facts clearly and counter the insurer’s misinterpretations.
How much does it cost to hire a life insurance denial attorney?
We work on a contingency basis. If we don’t recover money for you, you owe us nothing. Our goal is to make legal help accessible to anyone facing an unfair denial.