Plaintiff appeals as of right the trial court’s summary dismissal of his claim against defendant Auto Club Insurance Associatiоn. We reverse.
At 3:00 a.m. on Saturday, May 6, 1989, plaintiff *169 was injured when the motorcycle he was driving collided with an automobile stopped in the rоadway. Plaintiff and a pedestrian hit by the car as it fled the scene were taken to the hospital. The police found the car involved and impounded it. The car was registered to Sean McBride.
McBride had applied for no-fault insurance on the car with the Michigan Automobile Insurance Placement Facility through an Allstate Insurance Company agent on April 25, 1989. The placement facility assigned McBride’s appliсation to Auto Club. On May 3, 1989, Auto Club deposited McBride’s check. On May 17, the check was returned to Auto Club dishonored bеcause of insufficient funds in McBride’s checking account.
On May 19, 1989, Auto Club issued a "Policy Billing Notice” and a "Family Automobile Policy New Declaration Certificate.” The declaration certificate showed a policy providing no-fault and other insurance coverages in effect from April 25, 1989, through October 25, 1989, and listed Sean McBride as a named insured. The billing notice reflected no money having been received from McBride. It warned that the policy would be canceled unless McBride paid half the premium by June 5, 1989.
On May 24, 1989, Auto Club sent another notice to McBride. This notice stated that the policy had been canceled because оf nonpayment of the premium, and that coverage terminated at 12:01 a.m. on April 25, 1989. Apparently, McBride nеver submitted anything more to Auto Club.
Plaintiff filed this action against Auto Club, 1 *170 seeking a declaration that he was entitled to no-fault insurance benefits. Autо Club denied it was McBride’s insurer, claiming that it had rescinded the policy it had issued because of the dishonored сheck. The trial court granted Auto Club’s motion for summary disposition, brought pursuant to MCR 2.116(0(10), and dismissed the claim against Auto Club.
At issue on appeal is whether an insurance company can avoid paying no-fault insurance benefits to a third party when the purchaser of the policy paid the insurance premium with a check that is dishоnored. We hold that it cannot.
The May 19 bill and declaration certificate are evidence that Autо Club accepted McBride’s April 25 offer to enter into an insurance contract and communicated that acceptance to McBride. See
Hagerl v Auto Club Group Ins Co,
Auto Club argues that it has a right to void, retroactively cancel, or rescind any policy it issued McBride because of the dishonored check. We disagree.
A false representation in an application for no-fault insurance that materially affects the acceptance of the risk entitles thе insurer retroactively to void or cancel a policy. See
Auto-Owners Ins Co v Comm’r of Ins,
We do not find McBride’s failure to pay the premium sufficient reason to excuse Auto Club from performing its obligations under the policy. In
Coburn v Fox,
If no-fault insurers do not want to pay third-party claims on policies for which they have not beеn paid a premium, they should not bind themselves to coverage until they have actually received the premiums. When an insurer issues a no-fault policy, that policy provides security that no- *172 fault benefits will be paid and is deemed to provide insurance for the payment of benefits. See MCL 500.3101; MSA 24.13101.
Reversed.
Notes
Apparently out of fear оf the one-year statute of limitations, MCL 500.3145(1); MSA 24.13145(1), plaintiff named every insurance company in the state as a dеfendant. However, only Auto Club and State Farm were ever served with process. State Farm’s interest in the case stems from a policy it issued plaintiff on a automobile, which would *170 make it a lower-priority insurer. See MCL 500.3114(5)(с); MSA 24.13114(5)(c). Although listed as an appellee, State Farm filed no brief and did not participate in oral argument.
Auto Club attached a copy of McBride’s application to its appellate brief. However, because this was not part of the trial court record, it is not properly before this Court.
