This is deplorable. The Liberal government continues to allow insurance companies to exploit Ontario drivers

This is deplorable. The Liberal government continues to allow insurance companies to exploit Ontario drivers. #OnPoli pic.twitter.com/34metQFzux

— Jagmeet Singh (@theJagmeetSingh) October 19, 2016

Jagmeet Singh (NDP) has put this page up http://www.fairratesontario.com/

Thank you for signing up with Team Singh in the fight for fair auto insurance rates in Ontario. My promise to you is simple: I'll never stop speaking out on the issues that matter. 
The reality is that the Ontario Liberal government has the power and the ability to reduce auto insurance rates across the board, and promised to reduce
rates for drivers over two years ago. I refuse to let them back down on their promise. 
I'll keep you informed on our progress and future initiatives in this battle, and feel free to reach out and share your story or concerns.
Thank's for the support!
Until next time,
Jagmeet.

Source/more:

https://twitter.com/jagmeetNDP/status/788821925174710272

Broker Negligence Claims: Are You Adequately Covered?

Is your insurance broker adequately inquiring about your insurance needs? With the substantial decline of available medical, rehabilitation and attendant care benefits from $2 million to $1 million for catastrophically injured individuals, this is a question that will be asked more often in the realm of motor vehicle insurance. The recent cutbacks to the accident benefits regime in Ontario are expected to have profound effects on those seriously injured in accidents.

Source/more:

http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=544044

Van Galder v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company

[11] There is no issue that the respondent was seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident on January 20, 2004. She suffered significant physical injuries to both legs. Since the date of the accident, she has been unable to walk unaided and is now wheelchair-bound. Subsequent complications and surgeries that followed over the next several years resulted in the amputation of her lower right leg and left her with chronic pain.

[93] The appellant submits that the application judge’s order has the opposite effect: it “incentivizes” an insured person to delay his or her catastrophic application as long as possible in order to accrue tremendous amounts of interest in the interim. According to the appellant, this would also create difficulty for insurers in properly establishing reserves for claims files open beyond the 104 (or 260)-week period.

[94] These arguments were submitted to and rejected by the application judge. I also would not give effect to them.

[95] First and foremost, it defies common sense that a catastrophically impaired insured person would delay making an application that would open the door to desperately needed enhanced catastrophic benefits. I agree with the application judge’s observations in this regard:

A catastrophic injury is a serious one; catastrophically injured people require assistance to perform their activities of everyday living and to cover medical expenses. The nature of these expenses are such that they cannot be forgone by a victim or denied by an insurer, with the aim of accruing or avoiding costs.

[96] There is no question that the SABS requires an insured person to make the necessary applications and provide the required information to an insurer. However, these obligations must be understood in the context of a catastrophic impairment. The nature of many catastrophic impairments may necessarily render a catastrophically impaired insured person incapable of navigating and completing the complicated and detailed application process for a catastrophic impairment determination. As the application judge found, this is clearly what happened in the present case.

Source/more: 2016  ONCA 804 (CanLII), < http://canlii.ca/t/gvd47

Auto insurance: What do you get for $1 million?

Source: Ontario Today 

June 1, 2016

Season 2016, Episode 300251483

51:38

Major changes to auto insurance kick in on June 1st. The cost of basic coverage will drop an average of 3.7 per cent. But so will the payout for catastrophic injuries, from $2 million to $1 million.

Listen to the cuts on the CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2689763479

Auto Insurance: The Hidden Costs of the Provincial Budget

Last month, the Ontario Liberal government revealed its latest budget entitled “Building Ontario Up” but what it does to our auto insurance benefits is actually the opposite by significantly slashing benefits available to accident victims.

http://otlablog.com/hidden-costs-of-the-provincial-budget/

Reviewing the changes (cuts) to Ontario Car Insurance: Pay More Get Less Yet Again

The governing Liberals announced Ontario’s budget on April 23, 2015. Finance Minister Charles Sousa, backed by Premier Kathleen Wynne were in fine form that day. When one thinks of the term “budget“, we would think of all things financial, including taxes, public spending on healthcare, infrastructure, and education. And to be fair, healthcare, infrastructure and education were all addressed in the 2015 budget.

http://www.torontoinjurylawyerblog.com/2015/05/reviewing-the-changes-cuts-to-ontario-car-insurance-pay-more-get-less-yet-again.html

Accident victims victimized with Ontario 2015 budget

  Ontario's "Building Ontario Up" 2015 budget which was released yesterday (April 23, 2015) has some very negative news for motor vehicle accident victims. Worse, some media think the changes regarding auto insurance represents a loss for insurance companies. Canadian Press, in their "Commuters and students win, while insurers lose"  April 24, 2015  article in  the Waterloo Record is completely off the mark. The writer says, under the heading “Losers” in the Ontario budget, that insurance companies lose because they will be required to give drivers a discount for using winter tires and will lose some interest money in lowering the maximum interest charged on monthly auto insurance premium payments. This budget is a home run for insurers with the aforementioned loss a pittance to the gains insurers will make. http://deniedbenefitclaims.com/blog.html


 ...This government has also approved, with IBC lobbying, a redefinition of catastrophic injuries. Catastrophic injuries now imply a paraplegic, quadraplegic, someone blinded in a car accident, or someone who has lost a limb or has serious brain injuries. Insurers point to total  claim costs and how they are rising, therefore requiring higher premiums, but they don’t mention that the increase is not because of what they pay out to claimants but what they pay their third-party-for hire medical ‘experts’ to assess and counter what a claimant’s own treating doctor (or doctors) has determined and this in order to be able to deny benefits. Their medical vendors are paid much more than in private practice making it worthwhile to keep the job and write whenever possible in the insurers favour. Meanwhile, claimants are sent to multiple and repeated insurance examinations in order for these ‘insurance vendors’ to find a way to deny benefits.

Source/more:
 http://deniedbenefitclaims.com/blog.html