News and Views Archives - Page 14 of 14

Open letter to Stakeholders March 19 2013

…..One way to shine a light on auto insurer fee-for-service assessment ‘mills’ would be for the Ontario auto insurers to annually disclose to the public the total amount each assessor has been paid. By making this information transparent the public would be alerted to the potential for bias when medico-legal assessors become completely beholden to the private auto insurers for the lion’s share of their annual income. Currently in Ontario, this information is not disclosed to the public. The bias inherent in this secretive system is obvious. British Columbia’s public system has disclosed this information for years. Why aren’t Ontario’s private insurers doing the same?……FAIR is asking that the same disclosure of information practice be adopted here in Ontario. The benefits of greater transparency to Ontario’s injured auto insurer claimants who are forced to submit to these often shoddy insurer assessments are obvious……..

Open Letter to additional Stakeholders March 11 2013

This letter is to apologize for our oversight in not copying you our “Open Letter” (scroll down) on the subject of “secret cautions” in the context of Ontario’s auto insurance ‘independent’ medical examinations (IME/IE). FAIR believes this is a matter affecting many of Ontario’s health regulatory Colleges. We believe that both the OMA and the OPA have an important role to play in the matter since their respective positions on the issue of “secret cautions” of IME/IE preferred vendors of auto insurer commissioned assessments would carry significant weight. Both the OPA and OMA can influence Ontario health policy and practices in a way that FAIR cannot……So shouldn’t these assessors come as advertised by the auto insurers – highly qualified, completely impartial and well-respected by their licensing body? Is it fair for auto insurers, FSCO, the Colleges and the preferred insurer medico-legal assessors to continue to hide “secret cautions” related to previous flawed insurer assessments from the vulnerable accident victims who are forced to submit to these assessments?

An Open Letter to Ontario’s Auto Insurance Stakeholders March 4 2013

……it is unfair to require injured claimants to submit to insurer commissioned medico-legal assessments conducted by assessors who have been “secretly cautioned” for previous substandard assessments. Some health professionals doing these assessments in the Ontario auto insurance sector have been cautioned by their licensing body (College) more than once – but are not required to disclose these cautions to the subjects of their assessments. To make the matter even worse – the Ontario Auto Insurance Anti-Fraud Task has recommended to FSCO – and through FSCO to the Finance Minister – a regulatory change allowing a $500 fine to be levied against any injured claimant who fails to submit to a scheduled insurer assessment (IME/IE). If injured claimants are to be coerced into submitting to insurer commissioned IME/IEs in this way – then the insurers’ preferred assessors shouldn’t be hiding “secret cautions” from the now captive subjects of these ‘independent’ assessments……It is upon the outcome of these assessments that insurance adjusters base their decisions as to whether or not to provide treatment benefits (and/or other policy benefits) as spelled out in the accident victim’s policy. So it is important that…..

An Open Letter to Ontario’s Auto Insurance Stakeholders Feb 19 2013

Sent to: Kathleen Wynne, Premier; Andrea Howarth, Leader NDP; Tim Hudak, Leader Conservative Party; C. Sousa, Minister of Finance; Financial Services Commission of Ontario; Insurance Bureau of Canada; College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario; Health Professions Appeal and Review Board; Alliance of Community & Medical Rehab Providers; Ontario Trial Lawyers Association; Canadian Society of Medical Examiners; Association of Independent Assessment Centers; Deb Mathews, Minister of Health; J. Singh, MPP, NDP; Alan Shanoff, Toronto Sun

…….FAIR would like to know what each of the stakeholders think of this “three strikes” rule as a first step toward purging the rogue assessors from the Ontario auto insurance system. This rule would apply evenly to insurer assessors and treatment provider assessors alike. Do you support this idea – or do you oppose it? If you oppose a three strikes rule – why? What alternative solution for the substandard assessment problem do you have to offer? ……So FAIR would appreciate a timely reply in order that we, together with the other stakeholders, can all move forward in a collaborative effort to clean up the Ontario IME system and make sure that auto accident victims are treated fairly and with dignity.

Ontario needs to crack down on independent medical examiners: Accident victims’ group

Source: Daily News | 2012-12-10
An advocacy organization representing auto accident victims is taking issue with some of the recommendations of the recently released report from the auto fraud task force in Ontario.

Letter to the Editor: Independent medical examinations provide “necessary check and balance”

Source: Daily News | 2012-12-20
Editor’s Note: The following letter to the editor is in response to an article that appeared on Canadian Underwriter’s website on Dec. 10, 2012: Ontario needs to crack down on independent medical examiners: Accident victims’ group ________________________________________________________________

Read FAIR’s January 10, 2013 letter to Dwight Duncan, Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance of Ontario regarding the quality of Independent Medical Exams for Ontario’s accident victims and the proposed UDAP sanctions: Letter to Minister Duncan Jan 10 13-1

Read FAIR’s December 5, 2012 letter to the Minister of Health regarding the quality of Independent Medical Examinations here: Letter to Minister of Health Dec 5 2012.doc

Read the College of Physicians and Surgeons December 2012 policy Medical Expert: Reports and Testimony here: http://www.cpso.on.ca/policies/policies/default.aspx?id=7180

Read the Aug 17, 2012 College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario Consultation: Medical Experts – Reports and Testimony Policy. We felt compelled to provide comment on the conduct expected of physicians who examine auto accident victims in this submission.

News and Views

Alliance Presentation to the Standing Committee on Finance & Economic Affairs

Personal Journey to Independence – The Tina Manousos Story

The Catastrophic Impairment Panel Recommendations – Stakeholder Round Table Discussions on March 15, 2013

The Quality of the Independent Medical Examination

Ontario needs to crack down on independent medical examiners: Accident victims’ group

Letter to the Editor: Independent medical examinations provide “necessary check and balance”

Visit our Independent Medical Examinations page for further info.

Update on the Financial Services Commission of Ontario Anti-Fraud Task Force Final Report