• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

Latest News Articles

FAIR does not accept responsibility for comments, opinions, statistical information etc. associated with the links listed below. Any opinions, points of view, etc. are not necessarily shared by FAIR.

For a complete list of recent articles, please go to our 'Media Articles' page under 'In the News'.
We are updating our site and we appreciate your patience.

Private concussion clinics called a ‘Wild West’ of unregulated treatment

Volunteer neurosurgeons staffing a concussion hotline 24 hours a day?

That was the headline reported in the Toronto Star, CBC, CTV, and major newspapers in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario in early September.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/ concussion-hotline-baseline-te sting-treatment-industry-for- profit-unregulated-1.3833158

Limitation Period Dismisses Two ICBC Injury Claims

In the recent case (DeWolfe v. Jones) the Plaintiff spouses were both injured in a 2005 collision.  They dealt with ICBC directly but never reached settlement.  During a conversation the acting adjuster, in response to the Plaintiffs advising they were not prepared to settle at the time told them that “I am leaving on maternity leave at month end and he knows that he can call to settle if things improve at any point.”

http://bc-injury-law.com/blog/ limitation-period-dismisses-ic bc-injury-claims?utm_source=fe edburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_ campaign=Feed%3A+IcbcLaw+%28IC BC+Law%29

Jugmohan v. Royle, 2016 ONCA 827 (CanLII)

http://canlii.ca/t/gvg30

[3]         First, the appellant says the jury verdict is perverse as the evidence supported a finding that she suffered compensable damages as a result of the accident. This ground of appeal includes the appellant’s argument that the trial judge erred by correcting his jury charge from his initial instructions, in which he expressed the view that an assessment of zero damages would not be appropriate, to an instruction that if the jury were to find that the accident did not cause any new injury, or exacerbation of any pre-existing injury, an award of zero damages would be available.

[6]         The findings of a jury are entitled to great deference, particularly in cases such as this that depend largely on credibility. A jury verdict will not be set aside unless so plainly unreasonable and unjust as to satisfy the court that no jury reviewing the evidence as a whole and acting judicially could have reached it. On the evidence, it was open to this jury to conclude that the injuries that formed the basis of the appellant’s claim were not caused by the accident and therefore that the appellant was not entitled to any damages.

FAIR Submission to LSUC on Advertising and Fee Arrangements Oct 2016

Both “brokerage house” and “settlement mill” models bring the legal industry into disrepute and harm innocent and legitimately injured auto accident victims who may not get the quality representation or the full value of the settlement they deserve.

fair-submission-to-lsuc-on-advertising-and-fee-arrangements-oct-2016

Ontario Car Insurance – Will the Premiums Climb Up in 2017?

Ontario car insurance rates are still by far the highest across Canada. This publication looks, in detail, at these rates and scrutinizes the recent approval of rate changes by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) to understand what consumers can expect in future.

https://insureye.com/ontario-car-insurance-will-the-premiums-climb-up-in-2017/

Off-Coverage Still Means On-Claims

A FSCO arbitrator has confirmed that the first insurer that receives a completed application for accident benefits is required to adjust and pay the claim, even if the insurer is taking an off-coverage position.

http://www.insblogs.com/auto/off-coverage-still-means-claims/7011

$65,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment for Lingering but Non Disabling Soft Tissue Injury

In today’s case (Dhaliwal v. Randhawa) the Plaintiff was involved in a 2011 collision that the Defendant was found wholly responsible for.  The Plaintiff suffered an upper back and neck soft tissue injury that, while somewhat improved, continued to cause persistent symptoms to the time of trial.  Despite the long lasting lingering symptoms the injuries were not expected to be disabling.

http://bc-injury-law.com/blog/65000-nonpecuniary-assessment-lingering-disabling-soft-tissue-injury?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+IcbcLaw+%28ICBC+Law%29

Last chance to address your pre-2012 files!

LAWPRO encourages all lawyers to take immediate action to ensure their pre-2012 files will either resolve or be set down for trial by December 1, 2016. Remember, under the new Rule 48, matters commenced before January 1, 2012 that are not set down for trial will be automatically dismissed – without notice to counsel – on January 1, 2017. To avoid the dismissal of matters that will not be resolved, you must obtain consent from all parties to file a timetable and a draft order with the court by December 1, 2016 as Rule 48.14(4) requires this happen 30 or more days before the dismissal date.

http://www.mailoutinteractive.com/Industry/View.aspx?id=857642&print=1&q=1108012907&qz=20cead

Angry motorists berate first responders at fatal crash scene on Malahat

RCMP officers had to step in yesterday to protect first responders from angry motorists at the scene of a fatal accident on the Trans Canada Highway outside Victoria.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/victoria-malahat-highway-accident-road-closure-1.3826078

A Claimant’s Delays in providing required Information and filing a Claim to his Insurer result in denied Long-term Disability Benefits

On November 17, 2006, Cecil Richards was injured in a motor vehicle accident and consequently, he notified his insurer, Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, of his intention to pursue a claim for disability benefits issued under a group insurance policy. The insurer approved short-term disability benefits for Mr. Richards from November to January. However, before providing long-term disability (LTD) payments, they requested additional information from the plaintiff. 

http://www.personalinjurylawyerservice.ca/blog/a-claimants-delays-in-providing-required-information-and-filing-a-claim-to-his-insurer-result-in-denied-long-term-disability-benefits