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

Latest News Articles

March 13, 2019

Judge refuses to order insurance company to pay victims of negligent lawyer

TORONTO — It is up to the provincial legislature or the law profession’s regulatory body to decide whether victims should receive compensation when harmed by lawyers who end up without insurance coverage, an Ontario court has decided. 
 
________________________________________________________________

Recurring back pain and auto liability: how this court applied the two-year limit

If an injured cyclist in an auto liability action declares feeling better after treatment, takes a year off work, and then feels debilitating back pain after returning to work three years after the accident, does the two-year statute of limitations apply to the cyclist’s claim for lost income? 
 
_______________________________________________________________

Chatham woman out thousands after plow hits car

Susan Earle’s white 2012 BMW 1 Series sedan was legally parked on King Street when a municipal snow plow struck the car during the early morning hours on Feb. 14. 
 
_______________________________________________________________
TTC Insurance v. MVD Law, 2019 ONSC 7 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/hxzgj  
 
[1]                  This is a difficult case, in which allegations are made that a respected law firm, MVD Law Professional Corporation, was involved in some manner, in falsifying and submitting documentation in support of personal injury accident insurance claims made against the Toronto Transit Commission and its insurer, TTC Insurance Company Limited (collectively “TTC”). 

[16]              The Affiant deposes that he is aware that accident benefits adjusters at the TTC do have firsthand knowledge of many of the substantive issues in this action including but not limited to:

•        How the forged documents were relied upon;
•        The expenses that were incurred both specifically and generally;
•        The procedures of the department used to reduce fraud;
•        The obligations of the TTCICL to accident benefits claimants;
•        The reliance on invoicing provided by accident benefits claimants;
•        The procedure for the provision of funds to claimants;
•        The varying amount of time required to adjust accident benefits files;
•        How the time to adjust a file is impacted by the submission of extensive invoicing for personal services rendered; and
•        What level of honesty is expected on behalf of representatives of accident benefits claimants?
 
[17]              The Director of Claims further notes that six of the accident benefits adjusters that adjusted these files are still employees of the TTC. He points out that they have extensive experience adjusting accident benefits files for the TTCICL and have firsthand knowledge of elements of the above factors supporting the plaintiffs’ claim. In contrast he asserts that “Mr. Townsend has no firsthand knowledge of the list of relevant points” set out above.

Comments are closed.