Articles Posted in Car Accident

Car accident cases in Ontario should be simple.

The premise of one car, hitting another car by mistake or negligence; and thereby causing damages/injuries to another party ought to be basic tort law.

Unfortunately in Ontario, this couldn’t be further from the truth. The Ontario Government, at the behest of large insurers has created a system whereby the rights of people are not equal to the rights of large insurance companies. This system has become very complicated.

The law has been crafted in such a way as to minimize the exposure/risk for insurers to boost their profits, at the expense of everyday people like you and me.

I have never met an individual unaffiliated with car insurance industry (doctor, therapist, adjuster, lobbyist, lawyer, insurance company employee/agent) who has lobbied for changes to accident benefits or the Insurance Act. Yet, major changes to accident benefits and the Insurance Act happen on a near annual basis.

The election issue of lowering car insurance premiums was admitted by Premier Wynne to be a “stretch goal“. But reforms to the accident benefit system, and how tort claims proceed through the Courts was not a election issue. Yet these items are constantly being tinkered with at the expense of innocent accident victims to bolster insurer profits.

Continue reading →

Our personal injury lawyers constantly field questions from prospective clients regarding the basic steps of what to do after they’ve been involved in a car accident in Ontario.

We must admit, the laws surrounding car accidents in Ontario are confusing. They certainly aren’t straight forward by any means. It comes as no surprise to our lawyers that people have questions, and LOTS of them!

This is why our law firm has put forward this easy to understand claims guide in order to assist you after you or a loved one has been involved in a car accident, motorcycle accident, or have been hit by a car as a pedestrian.

Continue reading →

Our law firm has written many articles on how to complete the OCF-3 Disability Certificate in previous editions of the Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog.

Your can read these previous articles here, here, or here.

Don’t get me wrong. Those articles are great and contain valuable information for accident victims, their loved ones, doctors, therapists, even insurance adjusters.

But those articles are dated. Accident benefit and car insurance law is ever changing!!!

The standard OCF claim forms are constantly being updated. We have no reasonable explanation as to why the OCF forms get changed around so often aside from the government is constantly changing car accident law to keep lawyers and insurers on their toes. These changes generally seem to favour large insurers, but that’s another story all together.

The end result is that injured accident victims, doctors, therapists and rehab clinics may be using old forms which won’t be accepted by the insurer when submitted.

In fact, we’ve had experience with more than one adjuster who has submitted the wrong/dated OCF form to our clients by mistake. Our lawyers don’t blame them. The system and the constant tweeks/updates to accident benefit and car insurance law has made an already complex system even more complex and burdensome to accident victims, service providers and insurers alike.

Continue reading →

Not many people know this, but my family used to own a farm in Brockville, ON. Brockville is east of Kingston, near the Ontario/Quebec border. My grandparents owned a large farm with hundreds of cows, some chickens and large vegetable garden. I still have memories of the farm. On occasion, my grandfather would threaten me if I didn’t listen by saying he would take my toys away and give them to the cows. I sure listened after that.

As Goldfinger legend has it, the farm house burned down on account of a spontaneous hey fire. The only things that were saved were the  family photo albums. And if you ask around, there are a few epic shots of yours truly hanging out with the cows we had.

The reason I’m bringing up Brockville is because it reminds me of a special client our law firm worked with. This client was involved in a single car motor vehicle accident just outside of Brockville. Years went by and this person never thought of retaining a lawyer. She was at fault for the single car accident, so there was nobody to sue (you can’t sue yourself for your own negligence). The person was scared to consult with a lawyer for these reasons. S/he didn’t know where to turn, what to do, or how the system worked. She was lost, and just went along with whatever the insurer suggested.

The person sustained multiple orthopaedic injuries and a brain injury in the car accident. This was by no means a minor collision, and the injuries were significant. I’ll talk more about the significance of those injuries later on in this Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog Post.

Continue reading →

Sometimes, our personal injury lawyers think that car accident law has been purposely designed just to trip people up.

How else can you explain:

a) $36,920 deductible for a pain and suffering award in a car accident claim

b) $73,840 deductible for a pain and suffering award if involved in 2 car accidents

c) $110,760 deductible for a pain and suffering award if involved in 3 car accidents!

d) these deductibles increase year after year with inflation

e) serious and permanent threshold for pain and suffering claims which cannot be shared with the jury at trial

f) the deductibles cannot be shared with the jury at trial either

The purpose of car insurance and accident benefits is consumer protection legislation. This seems like a stretch goal (pardon the Kathleen Wynnism) considering the way the law actually works, and how the law has evolved such that the scales of justice are tipped so far in favour of insurers, it makes it almost miraculous if a Plaintiff succeeds at trial.

This theme of insurance law as consumer protection legislation was highlighted by the Supreme Court of Canada in the decision of Smith v. Co-operators General Insurance Co., [2002] 2 SCR 129, 2002 SCC 30 (CanLII) If you haven’t read the case, it’s worth a read. An oldie, but a goody!

Here, the Supreme Court stated:

There is no dispute that one of the main objectives of insurance law is consumer protection, particularly in the field of automobile and home insurance.  The Court of Appeal was unanimous on this point and the respondent does not contest it.  In Insurance Law in Canada(loose-leaf ed.), vol. 1, Professor Craig Brown observed, “In one way or another, much of insurance law has as an objective the protection of customers”….

The Supreme Court goes on to add:

In my opinion, the insurer is required under s. 71 to inform the person of the dispute resolution process contained in ss. 279 to 283 of the Insurance Act in straightforward and clear language, directed towards an unsophisticated person.  At a minimum, this should include a description of the most important points of the process, such as the right to seek mediation, the right to arbitrate or litigate if mediation fails, that mediation must be attempted before resorting to arbitration or litigation and the relevant time limits that govern the entire process.  Without this basic information, it cannot be said that a valid refusal has been given. 

Continue reading →