CIN is a non-profit Advocate for Insurance and Health Care Reform.
Postings are cut/paste from other sources. @Cinsurancenews #rally4accidentvictims #ABPetition #CPPbacklog
Showing posts with label motor vehicle accident. Show all posts
Showing posts with label motor vehicle accident. Show all posts
Hudak is now leaving
politics and has never shown any interest or knowledge in the topic
of auto accident victims or pi lawyers before - so why now that he is
leaving? If he is pushing through the Protection for Motor Vehicle
Accidents Bill to get the government to scrutinize personal injury
lawyers, it is highly likely that the Insurance Bureau of Canada
(IBC) is behind it.
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.
Accident Benefit
Coalition Victim Survey is for Accident Victims who were injured in
Ontario Motor Vehicle Collisions (MVCs). The purpose is to collect
information regarding victims’ experience in regards to obtaining
Ontario Accident Benefits from insurers. Absolutely no personal
information is collected or shared.
The Accident Benefit
Coalition (ABC) consists of a membership of Ontarians concerned with
issues surrounding the provinces’ mandatory Accident Benefits. It
was founded by NeuroConnect and FAIR Association and is committed to
advocating for Accident Victims in Ontario.
Unlike other types of litigation in Ontario, personal injury
actions arising from motor vehicle accidents are stacked against
plaintiffs from the beginning....
TORONTO - Changes to auto insurance benefits for motor
vehicle accident victims passed in the Ontario legislature Wednesday
as part of the provincial budget.
“God help us all,” Tammy Kirkwood said upon hearing the news.
“We’re getting a lot less coverage for a lot more money and I’m
not sure why.”
Kirkwood was one of hundreds of protesters at Queen’s Park
rallying against reductions in auto insurance benefits which they say
will have the most effect on victims with catastrophic injuries.
The 47-year-old Orillia woman said protesters were “flabbergasted”
that the provincial government “was trying to disable our resources
and our funding to recover.”
Part of the changes to auto insurance rules under the new budget
mean that combined coverage for medical, rehabilitation and attendant
care benefits for the catastrophically injured will be cut in half
from its current cap of $2 million to $1 million.
Kirkwood survived a 2008 collision when a dump truck hit her car.
She had to be pried free from her vehicle by firefighters, and was
deemed catastrophically injured.
She says she was only able to move forward because she had access
to the services she needed.
Unable to return to work, Kirkwood now volunteers as an advocate
with FAIR Association of Victims for Accident Insurance Reform.
New Democratic Party MPP Jagmeet Singh spoke at the rally in
support of their cause.
The cuts affect “the most vulnerable people,” such as people
with brain and spinal cord injuries, he said.
“They need benefit coverage ... to live an at least somewhat
decent life,” Singh pointed out.
A spokesman for Finance Minister Charles Sousa said the government
is “working hard to create a fair and affordable insurance system”
for the province’s 9.4 million drivers.
Ontario is “the only province in Canada to offer exclusive
catastrophic coverage,” Kelsey Ingram said in an e-mail.
“Catastrophically impaired claimants will also continue to be
able to sue an at-fault party to recover damages for health-care
expenses and potentially other claims,” she added.
The provincial government is also committed to making sure any
savings from these changes do not result in “excess profits” for
insurance companies, Ingram said.
“This is about lowering premiums while providing support and
protection for all Ontario drivers,” she said.
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.
Ontario: Be aware of the proposed Changes to Accident Benefits which impacts all of us (including our loved ones) when injured in a car crash.
If you or a loved one is injured in a car accident you are entitled
to certain benefits which you will rely on for your recovery. These
Accident Benefits are paid by you and regulated by the Ontario
Government.
In 2010 the Ontario Government permitted insurance companies to
dramatically cut these benefits for all accident victims. Now there are
more proposed reductions which will severely cut benefits for the most
vulnerable victims of car crashes. This will hurt victims' chances to
recover from accidents and load additional costs to our already overly
burdened health care system.
Finance Minister Charles Sousa recently announced the following proposed changes to the standard benefit level:
-$1 million coverage for medical and rehabilitation benefits and $1
million for attendant care benefits for catastrophically impaired
persons to be reduced to half and combined
-Non-catastrophic benefits to be reduced from $86,000 to $65,000
-Medical and rehabilitation benefits for non-catastrophically injured persons will be available for only 5 years instead of 10
-Non-earner benefits (available for students or recent graduates) limited to two years
These proposed changes are unethical, especially considering
Ontarians overpaid $840 million in 2013 and $3-4 billion from
2001-2013.
And unless we speak up, changes to our Accident Benefits could continue to take hits. It takes a lot to recover from a serious injury and many will be impaired for the entirety of their lives.
Please sign this petition, pass along, and contact your local MPP.
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.
Ken MacCoy of RitePartner Financial Serivces, who stated that “charging
contingency fees of up to 45 per cent on settlements is almost criminal.
No wonder Ontario auto insurance rates are so high.”
Windsor personal injury law firm Greg Monforton & Partners agrees
with the results of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association’s recent
conclusion that insurance companies are reaping the benefits while
drivers are left with no choice but to overpay.
Almost everyone in Ontario knows that, with the full collusion of the
government and its ministers, drivers are required to have insurance,
but insurance payouts are severely capped. We pay lots, they pay little.
Ontario now faces a crisis involving an “unprecedented” number of motor
accident victims whose insurers are not providing the necessary
assistance required of them, argues FAIR Association of Victims for
Accident Insurance Reform, a victims advocacy group committed to
industry reform.
FAIR on today's NewsTalk1010 with Jim Richards - go to the 29.39 minute mark to get to the interview
...
Ontario's auto accident victims are apparently in crisis - Jim
discusses this with the chair of FAIR, the Association of Victims for
Accident Insurance Reform, as well as someone from the Insurance Bureau
of Canada...
one broker, Ken MacCoy of RitePartner Financial Serivces, who stated
that “charging contingency fees of up to 45 per cent on settlements is
almost criminal. No wonder Ontario auto insurance rates are so high.”
York University Schulich School of Business conclude in a recent study that for the period 2001 to 2013 consumers in Ontario have likely overpaid for auto insurance by between $3 and $4 billion.
This money has not gone to accident victims nor to lower premiums for
consumers – instead this money has gone straight to the insurance
companies coffers. In 2010, deep cuts were made to auto insurance
benefits payable to those injured in auto collisions.
When you have been injured in a motor vehicle crash it is very important
to seek the assistance of a lawyer as soon as possible. There are two
main reasons for doing so. Firstly and most importantly, there is
legislation in Ontario that limits the time in which a person can bring a
law suit. For the vast majority of cases, this time frame is two years.
Reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court,
Nanaimo Registry, assessing damages for chronic soft tissue injuries and
headaches following a collision.
In today’s case (Snidal v. Spires)
the Plaintiff, who was 20 at the time, was involved in a 2010 collision
in Parksville BC. The Defendant admitted fault. The Plaintiff
suffered persistent soft tissue injuries and headaches which were partly
disabling and not expected to improve. In assessing non-pecuniary
damages at $85,000 Mr. Justice Fitch provided the following reasons:
[3] The accident caused persistent soft tissue
injuries to the plaintiff’s neck, back and right shoulder. She
continues to experience neck, back and shoulder pain – particularly
along the top of her right shoulder. She has suffered from headaches
since the accident, some of which are debilitating…
[131] The plaintiff is a young woman. More
than four years from the date of the accident, she continues to
experience fairly constant pain and occasionally debilitating
headaches. Although her symptoms have likely plateaued, they are now
chronic in nature and will be a permanent and regular feature of her
daily existence.
[132] The plaintiff is no longer able to
enjoy her favourite recreational activities, nor the active lifestyle
she once enjoyed.
[133] She has become more withdrawn. Her
self-esteem and sense of self-worth were seriously compromised in the
aftermath of the accident.
[134] She experienced a major depressive
disorder attributable to the accident and will likely experience some
residual, but manageable, symptoms of that disorder in the future.
[135] In all the circumstances of this
case, and applying the factors in Stapley v. Hejslet, I consider an
award of $85,000 for non-pecuniary damages to be just and appropriate.
Sadly, it is with ongoing regularity that we see
people with mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBI) being trapped within
minor injury claim limits following motor vehicle accidents. The problem
that we see time and again is that the mTBI is dismissed by the insurer
in the absence of immediately available objective findings...
by Donald Horne | 16 Mar 20,2015
Insurance Business
We asked brokers what percentage of their clients were telling white
lies when it came to their auto insurance policies – and the numbers
aren’t encouraging.
Five said that ‘probably half’ of their clients are fibbing on their
auto insurance, with four estimating between ‘10-20 per cent’ and four
more saying they believe ‘less than 5 per cent.’
Perhaps more telling, three brokers felt that ‘most of them (50-75
per cent)’ were telling lies, while another three felt that ‘just about
everybody (over 75 per cent)’ were lying on their auto insurance for a
cheaper premium.
Two brokers felt that ‘almost 30 per cent’ of their clients weren’t
being completely honest on their auto insurance, while no one voted for
5-10 per cent.
According to Anne Marie Thomas of Insurance Hotline, small lies
consumers tell when applying for insurance falsely inflate the cost for
everyone. In fact, roughly 15 per cent of people’s insurance premiums go
toward covering false claims.
“There are smaller types of insurance fraud that people commit, and
you don’t even think of it being fraud,” said Thomas in the article,
‘The reason your clients are paying an extra $3bn in annual premiums.’
“For example, telling your insurer ‘I don’t drive to work,’ and the
truth is, you drive 50 kilometres one way to work.”
Our next poll looks at the statement made by the head of the Royal
Bank of Canada last week, hinting that he may be taking his company out
of the P&C space.
Brokers Feel Used
I usually find articles in Insurance Business website informative even
though they are typically very brief.However,this piece doesn’t educate
anyone on anything as it relies on insurance brokers guessing they may
have been scammed by their clients based on how they “felt”. Very
scientific poll.Possibly 21 brokers were questioned,we’re not told how
large or small the sample was.Regardless,they think they have liars for
clients.Some thought clients were “fibbing”,some were “lying”or were
“telling lies”when making a claim.Some clients”weren’t being completely
honest” according to this poll.What is the distinction between
fibbing,lying,telling lies and not being completely honest,you’re either
lying or your not.
Then this article trots out another statistic,it’s validity in question
as well.The consumer is being forever being told that fraud increases
each driver’s premiums by 15 %. Collectively,that costs drivers 3
billion every year.But hang on,the insurance industry has also claims
that fraud costs them 3 billion dollars every year(currently
the IBC website has lowered their claim down to 2 billion). That’s 5-6
billion every year,an unsubstantiated claim.There’s no denying that
fraud does occur but to the extent that the IBC makes it out to be is to
fantastical to believe.A forensic report produced by KPMG offers
different information on the amount of fraud the industry claims they
are victims of.
The June 13,2012 report,Auto Insurance Fraud in Ontario states that
fraud in Ontario “ranges between $770 million and $1.6 billion per
year.”That’s a wide spectrum but understandable when you read the
report,it’s difficult to quantify because perpetrators attempt to avoid
detection.What this ultimately admits is they just don’t know.
One day maybe we can all have an adult conversation regarding auto
insurance in Ontario but with such obtuse information that’s constantly
evangelically promoted by the malpractice media,that discussion isn’t in
the near future.
