In A.M. v the Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company, 2019 CanLII58194 (ON LAT), a dispute arose over the A.M, the applicant’s Income Replacement Benefits (IRBs). He was injured on December 21, 2017 when his vehicle was rear-ended. He applied for “no-fault” accident benefits including IRBs under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) from his auto insurer, Dominion.
Recently, the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) published its 2021 Automobile Insurance Indexation Amounts Guidance. This Guidance, effective January 1, 2021, establishes the amounts related to insurance claims that are subject to indexation for 2021. Indexation is tied to the Canadian Consumer Price Index (CPI) and varies year to year.
Read More about 2021 Threshold and Deductible Amounts Released
Every year, over half a million Canadians sustain a traumatic brain injury. Motor vehicle accidents account for more than 50% of all acquired brain injuries, this according to the Brain Injury Society of Toronto.
It is generally acknowledged that the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) does not extend to traumatic brain Injuries (TBIs), regardless of the degree of initial severity. Any brain injury from mild to severe is equally outside the ambit of the MIG. It is also acknowledged that a concussion and Post-Concussion Syndrome (PCS) qualify as mild TBIs. Despite these acknowledgements however, Accident Benefits insurers continue to fight tooth and nail to keep concussion victims in the MIG.
Read More about Accident Benefits Newsletter – a Concussion Is (Still) Not a Minor Injury
This motion in Maria-Antony v. Ivaschenko, 2019 ONSC 4731 was brought by the defendants for leave to conduct a second psychiatric assessment of the plaintiff, Bridget Maria-Antony, who had been injured in two car accidents in 2009 and 2010. The moving defendants were involved in the second accident.
In H.S. and Allstate Insurance (2018 CanLII 132563), the parties held a Preliminary Issue hearing before Adjudicator Deborah Neilson of the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT). The Applicant, H.S. was seriously injured in a car accident on August 18, 2016. She submitted an application for Determination of Catastrophic Impairment (catastrophic) to the Respondent, Allstate, her automobile insurer. Allstate rejected the application. It claimed that she had used the form for accidents that occurred before June 1, 2016, whereas her collision occurred after June 1, 2016, when the current version of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) came into force. The significance of this distinction involved both the criteria for meeting the catastrophic definition and the amount of benefits available if she was successful.
Read More about ACCIDENT BENEFITS UPDATE: Which CAT definition applies to transitional policies?
As we have discussed at length in recent posts, initial concerns regarding the competence of the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) may have been somewhat overstated. This is not to say that accident victims are uniformly receiving appropriate adjudication at the LAT, as many decisions have come under fire for “cookie-cutter” responses and other failures. However, as the recent Reconsideration of 16-002325 v Aviva Insurance Canadashows, when such failures do occur, there is hope that a correct result can still be achieved.
Read More about Accident Benefits Updates- More Encouraging Signs from the LAT
In O’Brien v State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, a recent FSCO arbitration decision, the Applicant, Erik O’Brien was seriously injured in a car accident on August 21, 2008. Despite extensive rehabilitation, he continued to suffer from Chronic Pain Syndrome with related depression and fatigue issue. To support his family, he returned to work on modified duties 6 months after the accident, and full-time after that. However, he was unable to continue working approximately 2 years after his return to work.
Read More about Accident Benefits Update FSCO- Clarifies CAT Marked Impairment Threshold
Have you ever met someone who was in a car accident, settled his or her accident benefits claim or potential lawsuit but didn’t receive adequate compensation to cover ongoing medical treatment, lost time at work or personal or household assistance? Unfortunately, this happens far too frequently in Ontario- often, but not always, these accident victims are not represented by a lawyer, or by one who does not put their interest first.
Read More about Mistake, Duress, Unconscionability: Can I Overturn A Bad Settlement?
