DAILY NEWS Nov 22, 2012 3:57 PM - 8 comments

Ontario anti-fraud task force calls for licensing clinics, greater power for FSCO in final report

TEXT SIZE bigger text smaller text
By: Harmeet Singh, Online Editor
2012-11-22

The Ontario Automobile Insurance Anti-Fraud Task Force has released its final report outlining nearly 40 recommendations, chief among them expanding the power of the province’s industry regulator, greater public disclosure on the part of insurers and licensing certain health clinics.

CollisionSixteen months after its inception, the task force steering committee has recommended the Ontario government amend the Insurance Act to allow the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) greater power in investigating and enforcing fraud.

Background: Ontario Anti-Fraud Task Force interim report suggests working groups look into licensing health-care clinics, creating dedicated fraud investigation unit

Among other changes, the government could update the Insurance Act to allow FSCO to investigate and sanction “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” within organizations that might not currently be considered part of the insurance business under the Act, such as some healthcare providers, the report said.

FSCO should also be given authority to oversee and audit the business and billing practices of health clinics or other individual practitioners who invoice auto insurers, according to the report.

The Ontario government should consider changing FSCO’s mandate to reflect the new responsibilities, and commission an independent review of the updated regulator’s function within three years of changing its scope, the task force said. “FSCO will have to recognize that it will no longer be ‘business as usual,’” the report noted.

The committee has also recommended implementing licensing for health clinics that treat patients injured in auto accidents. The ownership, costs of services and potential for conflicts from such clinics should also be reported through a licensing process, the task force noted.

The committee has also recommended the government require insurers themselves to disclose publicly how they choose and assess certain service providers they send claimants to see, such as independent medical examiners, towing services and vehicle repair services.

Background: Anti-Fraud Task Force committee seeks public input on proposed measures to combat auto insurance fraud

Other recommendations include improved consumer education, including the creation of a new multi-lingual educational website and a fraud tip hotline run by FSCO.  

Car crashGreater information-sharing among organizations such as the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), and the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP). The task force also called upon other regulators and industry groups, such as medical colleges, to become more aware of auto fraud and do their own investigations.

In a statement following the release of the report, the Insurance Bureau of Canada said it is optimistic that the recommendations from the report will be implemented in the coming weeks and months.

“We are committed to working with government and all stakeholders to develop solutions to the many issues inherent in the current auto product,” it noted.



Horizontal ruler

Reader Comments

Most recent firstOldest first

Anonymous2

First thing we need to do is to abolish the dual Accident Benefits and Tort recovery system. Pick one but not both. This amounts to double-dipping. Minor injury cap is absolutely necessary especially for cases with only "soft-tissue injuries." Rehab clinics must be independent from any plaintiff lawyers and paralegal services and the FSCO mediator should take into account any relationship to consider its inherent bias.

Posted January 17, 2013 05:44 PM


harrry

Consideration should be given to licensing staff claims adjusters. As things stand now anyone off the street can be hired by an insurance company and be called a claims adjuster. There is generally a lack of expertise, education and practical claims handling experience at the company level.
Originally to be a claims examiner one had to have road experience handling claims. How else could the claims examiner gain the knowledge to direct the field claims adjuster. Everything is now backwards and this lack of prfessionalism and expertise will eventually reveal itself at arbitrations and trials with special awards and punitive damages

Posted November 26, 2012 07:10 AM


Sharma

The minor injury cap needs to be abolished. As well as insurer own examinations (waste of money that can be used to treat people). The insurance companies are using the MIG cap as a cure-all tool to make record profits. Instead move on the recommendation to license clinics. Only chiropractors or other medical professionals are allowed to own clinics. Now there is something even greater to lose in addition to clinic license: their medical license b/c they're professionals that are regulated and have ethical obligations to their societies. Insurance companies right now are raking it in. The pendulum needs to swing back to the consumers/claimants side for any fairness to be achieved.

Posted November 24, 2012 09:06 AM


frank

has any one seriously looked at the collision reporting centres and their rates that they charge the insurance companys come on, up to $300.00 plus per vechile and has any one looked at the mto data prior to crcs and after crc opened come on take a good long hard look at this and are the crcs a flood gate for insurance fraud and staged claims , also what is the cost that insurance companies are chargeing themselves when they screw the honest claimant around it would seem that the insurance companies are pointing finger at every one else how bizzare maybe it is time that they are looked and more properly regulated a

Posted November 24, 2012 12:18 AM


Don J Turner FCIP

How many fraud adjusters were on the panel. Did they included fraud committed by insurers, contractors, claims mgr, staff adjusters and lawyers. How many cases would proceed if the lawyer recommending denial to agree that if he looses then his fee is zero. When this was done in USA 75% of those files were settled. The largest cause of insurance fraud is the insurers refusal to properly educate their staff and telephone adjusters. Proper investigation tools allow for an adjuster to detyermine if there is a potential fraud. How many adjusters understand what you must prove in court tosuccessfully prove fraud. Suspected fraud represents 75% of fraud records even though recent audits continue to establish since 1980 the % of fraud has not increased in 30 years Fraud allows insurers a convienent reason to increase rates by 25%.

Posted November 23, 2012 05:38 PM


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