June 4, 2013 by Deanna Gilbert
In what seems to be an increasing phenomenon, injured Plaintiffs/Insureds are being asked to sign Consent Forms when they attend a tort defence medical examination or an insurer examination (“IE”) pursuant to the SABS. A common scenario arises when the Plaintiff/insured is suddenly presented with a Consent Form; refuses to sign it without first consulting with her lawyer; the examiner refuses to proceed with the assessment; and the whole process is stalled.
Is There a Legal...
May 29, 2013 by David Payne
Adam J. Tanel
Associate, Thomson, Rogers
The accident benefits maze is difficult to navigate at the best of times. This is especially true for victims of a traumatic brain injury (TBI). The Ontario Government recognized this special vulnerability with a 2010 regulation that declared that any individual with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) reading of 9 or less (as the result of a collision) is automatically deemed to be catastrophically impaired.
The purpose of this regulation was to create a “bright...
May 15, 2013 by Stacey Stevens
Esther J. Roche
Changes to Section 3 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (“the SABS”) were introduced by the Government of Ontario on September 1, 2010. The changes require an insured to prove expenses have been incurred in order to receive attendant care, housekeeping, and med/rehab benefits. Section 3(7)(e) of the SABS states that in order for an expense to be “incurred”, and thus payable by the insurer, it must...
April 4, 2013 by Stephen Birman
On March 26, 2013, a decision was rendered by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario in the case of Lenworth Scarlett and Belair Insurance Company Inc.
The applicant, Lenworth Scarlett, suffered soft tissue injuries, psychological injury and a TMJ injury arising from a motor vehicle accident which occurred on September 18, 2010.
The decision of Arbitrator John Wilson is the first decision regarding the Minor Injury Guideline ("MIG") pursuant to the MIG which came into effect on September 1...
March 25, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
Since the Sept. 1, 2010 re-introduction of the concept of "incurred" expenses and the qualifying term "economic loss" in the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule, automobile insurers and accident victims have debated how the terms incurred and economic loss should be applied when paying for allowable goods or services, Toronto personal injury lawyer Stacey L. Stevens writes in Lawyers Weekly.
"The debate is even more pronounced when the person providing the goods or services is a...
February 11, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
Seriously injured accident benefit claimants in Ontario no longer are required to dispute a “catastrophic impairment” denial within two years from the date of the denial, according to a recent arbitration decision, Toronto plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer Darcy Merkur writes in Lawyers Weekly. Read Lawyers Weekly
“Because qualifying as having suffered a ‘catastrophic impairment’ allows an Ontario motor vehicle accident claimant to essentially...
February 5, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
Just as a common understanding of the term “catastrophic impairment” has been reached, its definition is being completely reworked with an aim for a more accurate and objective system, Toronto plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer Darcy Merkur recently discussed at the Back to School with Thomson Rogers and Spinal Cord Injury Ontario Conference.
“Changes to the definition of the term catastrophic impairment are coming,” Merkur, partner with Thomson Rogers,...
January 22, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
A streamlined accident benefits dispute process is needed to improve the system surrounding recovery for claimants, Toronto plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer Darcy Merkur writes in Law Times. Read Law Times
“What we need is a better dispute process that’s more efficient and timely,” writes Merkur, partner with Thomson Rogers. “We need a system that’s accessible without delays.”
In the article, Merkur describes this common scenario: A...