DAILY NEWS Jun 22, 2012 3:24 PM - 10 comments

Lawyers resign from Ontario auto insurance committee

TEXT SIZE bigger text smaller text
2012-06-22

Several lawyers are protesting recently announced changes to the definition of catastrophic injury for accident victims by quitting an auto insurance committee created by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO).

The Toronto Star reported the group of personal injury lawyers, who include Richard Halpern, partner at Thomson Rogers, Roger Oatley of Oatley Vigmond Personal Injury Lawyers LLP, Nigel Gilby, partner at Lerners LLP and Stephen Firestone of Lackman Firestone, resigned because their recommendations on catastrophic impairment were ignored.

“The Ontario government is looking at narrowing the definition of catastrophic impairment,” Halpern told the Star. “This will in turn deprive many seriously injured victims of the support they reasonably need and expected from the protection they thought they were buying with their auto premium dollars.”

The insurance industry “is always trying to get governments to roll back the rights of accident victims,” added Oatley. “The government will now claim they consulted with stakeholders, including lawyers and consumers.

“We were invited because of our expertise, but ignored. We resigned because the process was a sham. Can you imagine, for example, that in this day and age, emotional injury has to be ignored when assessing the impact of an injury – even though our highest court recently said it should be taken into account?”

The informal legal committee was established by FSCO Superintendent Philip Howell to seek advice on auto insurance.

On June 12, the Ontario regulator made its recommendations to the provincial finance minister on rules for determining catastrophic impairment.

FSCO supported the findings of an expert medical panel in its proposals, including not combining physical impairments with psychiatric or mental/behavioural factors for catastrophic injury, an interim status for claimants who require intensive and prolonged rehabilitation to receive immediate treatment and the use of several clinical and diagnostic tools in determining catastrophic impairment.



Horizontal ruler

Reader Comments

Most recent firstOldest first

Tammy

The insurance companies, just don't like to have to pay out money for any reason! Sure, the lawyers make a percentage from their clients butthey have to get paid too. What about these poor victims who's lives will never be the same again!
As far as not including emotional Injury in a claim. When u are unable to do the things you take for granted everyday you can become very angry and frustrated and lash out at loved ones, have nightmares, and an uneasy feeling every time you get in a car. How can anyone think that an accident has no detrimental affect on emotions?

Posted November 22, 2012 09:12 PM


robert

i happen to agree with paula's post - it's all about$$$$$ from the lawyers' point of view the more the claim the more the fee.

Posted June 29, 2012 04:00 PM


Brian

The PANEL of experts that drafted the recommendations is not the same as the COMMITTEE from which these lawyers have resigned. This new column conflates the two - no doubt in a self-sevingly deliberate manner. This distinction matters.

Posted June 26, 2012 12:15 PM


Paula

All of the above lawyers who resigned only represent clients that are Catastrophically impaired. That is how they make their money. The more lenient you are with the definition, the more clients they will try and push into the category of “catastrophic”

The less Catastrophic clients they have, the less money they will make. Obviously if they are on a panel coming up with the criteria, they will know how to use the same criteria for the benefit of the multimillion dollar firms they work at.


Lets ignore what all the medical experts have to say, and just use the opinion of laywers to come up with the criteria to determine what makes an injury catastrophic.

Posted June 26, 2012 09:53 AM


Betty Clarke

Support their decision to quit a committee that is obviously operating for the wrong reasons. Being part of such a closed minded thinking committee is not good. Time is way too valuable to waste on such a pessimistic group.

Posted June 26, 2012 08:17 AM


FirstPrevNextLast
Horizontal Ruler

Post A Comment

Disclaimer
Note: By submitting your comments you acknowledge that Canadian Underwriter has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Please note that due to the volume of e-mails we receive, not all comments will be published and those that are published will not be edited. However, all will be carefully read, considered and appreciated.

Your Name (this will appear with your post) *

Email Address (will not be published) *

Comments *



* mandatory fields