• 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.

Proposed Amendments to Insurance Act Regulation 461/96 (Court Proceedings For Automobile Accidents That Occur on or After November 1, 1996)

Ministry: Ministry of Finance Regulation Number(s): O. Reg. 461/96: Court Proceedings For Automobile Accidents That Occur on or After November 1, 1996
Bill or Act: Insurance Act Summary of Proposal: Further to the 2015 Ontario Budget commitment to ensure that the auto insurance system reflects the effects of inflation and to restore the policy rationale and integrity of the tort deductibles to when they were last updated in 2003, amendments to Insurance Act Regulation to 461/96 (Court Proceedings For Automobile Accidents That Occur On Or After November 1, 1996) are proposed to adjust the deductibles on court awards for non-pecuniary (i.e. pain and suffering) damages to reflect inflation since 2003, and link the deductibles to future changes in inflation.

The current $30,000 deductible amount in the case of damages for non-pecuniary loss would be adjusted to $36,540 untilDecember 31, 2015, and on January 1, 2016 and every subsequent year, this amount would be revised by adjusting the amount by the indexation percentage published under Insurance Act subsection 268.1 (1) for that year.

The current $15,000 deductible amount in the case of damages for non-pecuniary loss under clause 61 (2) (e) of the Family Law Act, would be adjusted to $18,270, and on January 1, 2016 and every subsequent year, this amount would be revised by adjusting the amount by the indexation percentage published under Insurance Act subsection 268.1 (1) for that year.

These proposed regulation amendments are consistent with the Building Ontario Up Act (Budget Measures), 2015 proposed amendments that, if passed, will amend the Insurance Act to adjust the monetary thresholds beyond which the tort deductible does not apply to reflect inflation since 2003, and link the thresholds to future changes in inflation.

Existing optional coverage (Added Coverage to Offset Tort Deductibles) to reduce the tort deductible amounts will remain unchanged, and consumers will continue to have options to customize their coverages to suit their needs.
Further Information:  O. Reg. 461/96: Court Proceedings For Automobile Accidents That Occur On Or After November 1, 1996 
 Insurance Act 
Proposal Number: 15-MOF012 Posting Date: May 14, 2015 Comments Due Date: June 29, 2015 Contact Address: Insurance Policy Unit
Financial Institutions Policy Branch
Ministry of Finance
95 Grosvenor Street
Frost Building North, 4th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 1Z1 Comment on this proposal via email

_____________________________________________________________

Standing Committee presenters this week who spoke about auto insurance at Queen’s Park

Ontario Rehab Alliance

We will undoubtedly see fellow Ontarians, whose horrific crashes result in quadriplegia, severe brain injuries and amputations, live the rest of their lives with little or no dignity. The future of their children, wives, husbands or parents will be forever changed as they have to rededicate their lives to being full-time caregivers in light of these deep cuts to the benefits.

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?Date=2015-05-19&ParlCommID=8997&BillID=3295&Business=&locale=en&DocumentID=29093#P814_208227

Ontario Spinal Cord Injury Solutions Alliance

We hope you take this testimony seriously and really encourage our government to look at these auto insurance benefits and their thresholds because we feel that we can provide support in that. The budget can’t go through with just the 50% reduction. It will destroy people’s lives and we will be more dependent on the health care and public system. We hope that you can consider making amendments to this Bill 91 to ensure that people are having the appropriate services under the catastrophic injury legislation.

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?locale=en&Date=2015-05-20&ParlCommID=8997&BillID=3295&Business=&DocumentID=29100#P840_221592

McLeish Orlando

If there still have to be further savings, and if that needs to be done outside—we have to have a profitable insurance product, absolutely, but if more savings have to be done, don’t do it on the backs of the quadriplegics and the severe traumatic brain injuries. Look elsewhere to make your savings. Look at changing the system, procedural changes so that it’s easier for people to make claims without lawyering up. There are all kinds of different avenues.

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?locale=en&Date=2015-05-20&ParlCommID=8997&BillID=3295&Business=&DocumentID=29100#P462_113845

Association of Independent Assessment Centres

The AIAC supports the revision of the definition of “catastrophic impairment.” That being said, there are currently only a few hundred properly trained and qualified experts in Ontario to conduct these complex and important assessments. In the event that there is any change, there should be an appropriate rollout period allowing for proper training and certification.

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/committee-proceedings/committee_transcripts_details.do?locale=en&Date=2015-05-20&ParlCommID=8997&BillID=3295&Business=&DocumentID=29100#P643_164829

Ms. Maia Bent: The change that’s being proposed to the definition of “catastrophic” is just one more blow to people who have been hurt. Right now, it is very, very difficult to fit into that definition. Only a very small number of people every year get into that category, and everybody else is left with a real pittance of benefits. Those people are the most hurt and the people who need it the most. If you are saying that even fewer people can even get into that category, then you’re throwing seriously, seriously hurt people into the other category of people who are getting virtually nothing. The changes that are being proposed are going to actually narrow quite considerably the people who can get into that category. It’s going to be a real problem for those people and their families.

Ms. Karen Rucas: It means fewer people are going to get catastrophic impairment. Right off the top, they’re getting rid of the Glasgow coma scale. Those are the people who are unconscious at the scene.

There are other more stringent measurement tools that they’re going to be using, so fewer people are going to be—as it is, only 1% are catastrophic. So now even fewer than 1%—and, again, I don’t understand why the insurers are tackling the most seriously injured.

In fact, I think what consumers think is that they actually have $1 million of coverage, but they don’t. They’re shocked when they find out—“It’s $3,500? You mean, that’s all I get?” Often, again, they run out of the $3,500. We’re making these levels so arbitrary, and it’s just not feasible anymore to provide them with the rehab they need and to get them back to work and get them back functioning. Instead, these people go on CPP or what have you.

Sousa’s budget deserves support

For years, Ontario’s spendthrift, deficit-addicted Liberal government has resembled a runaway train racing toward a sharp curve on a mountain pass. Anyone watching knew a wreck was inevitable — unless someone, somehow regained control of that great, roaring machine.

http://www.mississauga.com/opinion-story/5574399-sousa-s-budget-deserves-support/

Car Accident Insurance Claim Procedure in Ontario

In your driving history, there may eventually be a time that you will be involved in an auto accident that may involve injury and damaged. The next step will be to file a claim with your insurance representative or company. This article will explain how the claim process works.

http://www.ratelab.ca/accident-claim-process/

EASTERN PASSAGES: Gold-plated justice

Here’s a snippet from Supreme Court Justice Andromache Karakatsanis in a 2014 case: “(Undue) process and protracted trials, with unnecessary expense and delay, can prevent the fair and just resolution of disputes. The full trial has become largely illusory because, except where government funding is available, ordinary Canadians cannot afford to access the adjudication of civil disputes. … Prompt judicial resolution of legal disputes allows individuals to get on with their lives. But, when court costs and delays become too great, people look for alternatives or simply give up on justice.”

http://www.journalpioneer.com/Opinion/Columnists/2015-05-22/article-4155586/EASTERN-PASSAGES%3A-Gold-plated-justice/1

Note Taking and Insurance Claims; they go hand in hand (Ontario)

Intact Insurance has some great television commercials where an terrible accident happens (like a car driving in to a swimming pool); followed by a scene involving an insurance policy holder calling the insurer over the phone. The next scene is that of a well lit and pleasant call centre whereby an insurance agent from Intact proceeds to collect that person’s information and open up a claim in 5 minutes or less. Pretty impressive! The ad is meant to show the ease and speed in which Intact can open a file and process your claim.

http://www.torontoinjurylawyerblog.com/2015/05/note-taking-and-insurance-claims-they-go-hand-in-hand-ontario.html

Ontario Health Coalition calls on government to ‘stop the cuts’

Members of the Ontario Health Coalition and their supporters staged a peaceful demonstration outside of Liberal Cabinet Minister Ted McMeekin’s Waterdown constituency office on May 22 as part of the group’s escalating campaign against hospital cuts.

http://www.flamboroughreview.com/news-story/5640483-ontario-health-coalition-calls-on-government-to-stop-the-cuts-/

Yellow light and left hand turn accidents – who’s at fault?

In the legal industry, we often see cases where both drivers involved in a motor vehicle accident believed they had the right of way. These accidents could likely have been avoided had each driver had a better understanding of the law and the rules of the road.

http://oatleyvigmond.com/yellow-light-and-left-hand-turn-accidents-whos-at-fault/#.VV-dBPBqS1A

Stop Reducing Ontario Accident Benefits – Save the Date: Rally June 3 at Queen’s Park

Save the Date: Rally June 3 at Queen’s Park to be confirmed next week!

Sign the petition – 18,123 people have already signed it!

https://www.change.org/p/ontario-mpps-finance-minister-charles-sousa-stop-reducing-ontario-accident-benefits/u/10734693

Finance Minister Charles Sousa recently announced the following proposed changes to the standard benefit level:

-$1 million coverage for medical and rehabilitation benefits and $1 million for attendant care benefits for catastrophically impaired persons to be reduced to half and combined

-Non-catastrophic benefits to be reduced from $86,000 to $65,000

-Medical and rehabilitation benefits for non-catastrophically injured persons will be available for only 5 years instead of 10

-Non-earner benefits (available for students or recent graduates) limited to two years

These proposed changes are unethical, especially considering Ontarians overpaid $840 million in 2013 and $3-4 billion from 2001-2013.

And unless we speak up, changes to our Accident Benefits could continue to take hits. It takes a lot to recover from a serious injury and many will be impaired for the entirety of their lives.

Please sign this petition, pass along, and contact your local MPP.

Only the Rich Can Afford Lower Car Insurance Premiums

No fault accident benefits were supposed to compensate Ontario drivers for the significant reduction in their right to sue. 20 years ago when the right to sue for car accidents was restricted to serious and permanent injuries, the quid pro quo was a generous amount of benefits to cover lost income, caregiver and housekeeping help and medical care.

http://otlablog.com/only-the-rich-can-afford-lower-car-insurance-premiums/