Canadian Insurance News

The Fair Association of Victims for Accident Insurance Reform has taken aim at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario’s 2014 Draft Statement of Priorities, describing it as a "Christmas wish list" for insurance companies.

“Where is the protection talked about in this statement? Why are tens of thousands of Ontario’s accident victims lining up for hearings when they’ve been wrongfully denied the benefits they paid for in a time of need?” says Rhona DesRoches, chair of FAIR, in an open letter to Philip Howell, CEO and superintendent of financial services for FSCO. “Over and over the changes to our coverage read like a Christmas wish list for the Insurance Bureau of Canada.”

FAIR had criticized the Ontario government just prior to the election announcement, after it was bumped from its spot on the list of groups to speak on Bill 171. (See FAIR cries foul over Bill 171 hearings.) At the time, DesRoches criticized a list of “only eight presenters, none of whom speak to the issues of Ontario’s accident victims.”

This time around, Desroches and FAIR have chosen FSCO as their target for what they perceive as a built-in inequality in the insurance claim system.

“The reality of making an auto accident claim in Ontario versus the ‘open and transparent system that protects the public’ that is described on the FSCO website and in this draft statement are two totally different realities,” says DesRoches. Accident victims do not feel protected or that they are being assisted in a ‘fair and open system’ that is looking after their best interests. Half of those who make a claim are unable to access medical rehab and other needed benefits and yet ‘FSCO aims to improve the ways in which it regulates and delivers services to foster consumer protection in the financial services sectors.’”

DesRoches asks Howell why FSCO hasn’t taken any action to protect vulnerable accident victims from predatory assessors.

“FAIR has asked this question many times – we’ve asked the Anti-Fraud Task Force, Justice Cunningham at the DRS review, and our legislators,” says DesRoches. “FSCO is aware that some of Ontario’s regulatory colleges are failing in their duty and yet you are quite willing to rely on this broken system of flawed medical assessments rather than fix this fundamental problem.”

When contacted by Insurance Business about the open letter, FSCO had this to say:

“As many of the concerns outlined in the FAIR letter relate to changes to legislation, we would like to clarify that any legislative or regulatory changes are led by the Ontario Government, not by FSCO.

“FSCO is accountable to the Minister of Finance, and Section 11 of the FSCO Act requires that FSCO publish in the Ontario Gazette and deliver to the Minister of Finance by June 30 of each year a statement setting out FSCO’s proposed priorities and the reasons for adopting these priorities. As part of this process, FSCO is seeking public input before publishing its proposed priorities for the fiscal year.”

FSCO also stated that its role is to protect the public interest and promote public confidence in the sectors it regulates.

“Under the FSCO Act and the Insurance Act, our responsibilities specific to auto insurance include:
- overseeing how auto insurance is priced;
- approving the rules that companies can and cannot use to refuse to sell insurance to a consumer;
-approving risk classification systems, which insurers use to determine individual consumers’ rates;
- licensing those who sell insurance in Ontario; and
- reviewing complaints against insurance companies and those who work in the insurance industry.”

COMMENTS

Devils Trumpet on 03/06/2014 4:34:28 PM
If FSCO is the paper tiger Mr.Howell claims it to be,then it's obvious that the agency be restructured,it's clearly is not in the best interest of the public.Even the industry-financed FSCO ombudsman rarely,if ever sides with the claimant.With no public representation and input at FSCO,is it any wonder?
This government has gone to great lengths to silence FAIR,being bumped at the last opportunity to speak on Bill 171 was another egregious attempt to silence accident victims.
Rather than make the system more "fair and open"the new anti-fraud measures re-victimizes accident victims while increasing profits for the industry.The attack upon survivors will undoubtedly continue in earnest,accident victims will continue to push for insurance reform that benefits them as well as the industry.FSCO may be a paper tiger,the survivors are not.
TammyK on 03/06/2014 6:16:55 PM
So basically, FSCO, the government, and the insurers are playing a blame game. There isn't any accountability for not adhering to the contract aka, auto policy, we are forced to buy! Insurers get their money from the policy holders (possible victim). The politicians get their pockets lined from the IBC through"contributions" via membership money from the insurers. FSCO is "accountable" to the government by ensuring the insurers are kept in line.

- overseeing how auto insurance is priced;
- approving the rules that companies can and cannot use to refuse to sell insurance to a consumer;
-approving risk classification systems, which insurers use to determine individual consumers’ rates;
- licensing those who sell insurance in Ontario; and
- reviewing complaints against insurance companies and those who work in the insurance industry.

REVIEWING COMPLAINTS? WHAT ABOUT INVESTIGATIONS? TRANSPARENCY?

NO ONE in these parties is held liable or accountable for the abuse and traumatizing that the accident victims are submitted to!
These are the same "parties" that are paid to ensure victims of MVA will have their recovery needs available!
Concerned Citizen on 03/06/2014 8:36:18 PM
"reviewing complaints against insurance companies and those who work in the insurance industry."

FSCO is certainly not doing it's job in the above "responsibility". Ontario is turning a blind eye to the way Accident Victims are being treated, especially seriously injured victims. The Christmas Wish List mentioned in the letter is 100% correct. Shame on our Politicians and FSCO.
Concerned Citizen on 03/06/2014 8:49:08 PM
FAIR is "bang on" in the above letter.

I agree with FSCO in that it is the Gov't making these changes that are hurting Accident Victims, but they are certainly not doing their job in regard to the last listed responsibility.
"...reviewing complaints against insurance companies and those who work in the insurance industry."
Griswald G on 04/06/2014 9:11:16 AM
The insurance industry with their slash and burn mentality in the name of savings has created a system that just isn't working. This should be an election issue. If we injure someone we want the system to work for that person and not be punishing them for making a claim. The medical examinations Fair talks about should be accurate diagnosis of injuries and not used as a dishonest reason for not paying up. There shouldn't be good and bad insurance companies. They should all have to stand behind their contracts and if they don't they should be kicked out of the province and not allowed to sell useless policies to consumers. If the Financial Services commission doesn't know or can't figure out that it is their job to make sure that we are covered then they shouldn't hold themselves out as regulators. Bad job all way around for accident victims.
Rick on 04/06/2014 12:24:56 PM
No government has taken on the issue since no-fault came in - everything a patch job that benefits insurers. What we have now doesn't resemble what we started off with and just keeps getting worse each time. Most expensive premiums and worst coverage in Canada.
Friendly Reader on 03/06/2014 9:03:47 AM
Way to go FAIR! Someone has to stand up against the insurance companies that are abusing their powers. To be fair, not all the companies are the same, but the ones that are trying to get out of paying legitimate claims need to be held accountable.
paul c. armstrong on 03/06/2014 10:55:41 AM
Nothing appears 'Fair.' Legitimate claimants whose needs are unaddressed allegedly by insurers and fraudulent claims that get addressed. If fraud is the key to treat all claims, then the 'Government' not 'FISCO' has to do it. There is a 'way' but there needs to be a 'will.' Maybe Mr. Hudak has this issue as a priority in his quiver of arrows.