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 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.
The report looks into how autonomous vehicles will impact road safety, road infrastructure, as well as insurance premiums and policy coverage. It also discusses how autonomous vehicles will lower traffic injuries and fatalities in what the report calls the greatest change in the automotive industry since the introduction of motor vehicles.
http://www.ilstv.com/canada-
The OFL recently filed a formal complaint with the Ontario Ombudsman Barbara Findlay. The 200-page submission was written by the authors of a previous headline-making November 2015 report entitled “Prescription Over-Ruled: Report on How Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board Systematically Ignores the Advice of Medical Professionals”.
http://www.vandykelaw.ca/2016/
Basic income, or guaranteed annual income, is a payment to eligible families or individuals that ensures a minimum level of income. Ontario will design and implement a pilot program to test the growing view that a basic income could help deliver income support more efficiently, while improving health, employment and housing outcomes for Ontarians.
https://news.ontario.ca/mcss/
Benefits to those injured in car accidents in Ontario have been slashed as of June 1, part of sweeping changes to the provincial “no fault” accident benefits system that will leave victims struggling to make ends meet, says Toronto personal injury lawyer Simmy Yu.
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. was ordered by a federal judge to pay over $8.1 million in damages. The order comes after a jury came to the conclusion last year that the insurer acted negligently and in bad faith in denying a claim for the death of an auto accident victim, reported Property Casualty 360.
When the “future contract” provisions were eliminated from the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule effective April 15, 2004, the industry breathed a sigh of relief that yet another category of “questionable” claims for Income Replacement Benefits were being eliminated.
https://www5.fsco.gov.on.ca/AD/4935
At the Pre-Hearing of this matter before me, the parties agreed to a schedule for the exchange of materials for the Preliminary Issue Hearing. At that time, counsel for the Applicant advised that his client was committed to attending the Insurer Examination. Nevertheless, in part as a result of the history of the Applicant’s conduct, counsel for the Insurer thought it appropriate and necessary to have the Preliminary Issue Hearing proceed.
https://www5.fsco.gov.on.ca/AD/4934
At the outset of the Hearing, State Farm moved to exclude a report obtained by the Applicant from a chronic pain specialist which had been served in accordance with the Code prior to the Hearing commencement. I ruled that the report was admissible since the author of the report was listed on State Farm’s witness list for cross-examination. State Farm also sought to have excluded an accounting report that calculated the quantum of the income replacement benefits that should be paid. The report was served in accordance with the Code prior to the Hearing. Given the compliance with the Code, I ruled that the report would not be excluded. If an Insurer is concerned that it will not have sufficient time to serve responding material, it should address the issue of the timing of service of reports at the Pre-Hearing stage.