Ontario NDP should not look to B.C. for auto insurance reform

By Paul Russell, LegalMatters Staff • The Ontario NDP’s pledge to reform provincial auto insurance coverage is a recipe for disaster, especially if the new system is modelled after publicly funded no-fault systems in other provinces, says Toronto personal injury lawyer Joshua Goldberg.

“Moving to a government-controlled no-fault insurance system, similar to what is used in Manitoba and B.C., is a horrible, horrible idea,” says Goldberg, principal of Joshua Goldberg Law.

“Sure, the current insurance regime in Ontario has shortcomings, but it is still far superior to the complete no-fault system in place in other parts of Canada,” he adds.

Goldberg explains that Ontario has a partial no-fault system, where those injured in accidents have some treatment options available to them under their policies. If that is not enough, they can sue for damages to cover long-term pain and suffering.

“Under the current system, people injured on our highways can work with a personal injury lawyer to make sure that their insurance company is giving them the compensation they deserve,” he says.

B.C. drivers generally cannot sue after accidents

By comparison, Goldberg says B.C. drivers are generally not allowed to sue for pain and suffering. He points to s. 115 of B.C.’s Insurance (Vehicle) Act, which states:

(a) a person has no right of action and must not commence or maintain proceedings respecting bodily injury caused by a vehicle arising out of an accident, and

(b) no action or proceeding may be commenced or maintained respecting bodily injury caused by a vehicle arising out of an accident.

There are a few exceptions, he says, as people who can be named as defendants in B.C. motor vehicle personal injury lawsuits include vehicle manufacturers, at-fault drivers convicted of “prescribed” criminal offences and people who are licensed to serve alcohol.

• Mental-health LTD claims sure to spike due to COVID
• COVID-19 is sure to spark long-term disability claim disputes
• Advice on slip and falls, COVID, accidents, holiday parties and pets

The Trial Lawyers of British Columbia agrees that the shift to no-fault insurance is “a deliberate taking away of the right of British Columbians to receive fair access to the courts and a fair settlement to those injured on our roads.

“If Ontario moves to a government-run no-fault insurance where lawsuits for damages are not allowed, we will have a system that doesn’t really look after the injured,” says Goldberg. “People suffering long-term pain will have to deal with government bureaucrats who couldn’t care less.”

NDP platform is worrisome

According to the Ontario NDP platform, if the party is elected on June 2, it will set up a commission to investigate and recommend a new insurance system. In interviews, NDP leader Andrea Horvath has expressed interest in the no-fault systems in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, as well as Quebec’s public/private hybrid system.

Goldberg tells LegalMattersCanada.ca that Horvath’s comments worry him.

“Not only do I and other personal injury lawyers think a move to a complete no-fault system would be a bad idea, insurance companies also oppose it,” he said.

He points to statements by the Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC), which says the NDP’s proposal would not result in cost-savings for drivers. In fact, the IBC says a move to a government-run auto insurance system would “place an enormous burden on taxpayers – whether they drive or not – with billions of dollars in new costs.”

“That includes establishing a new government bureaucracy. That means less money to invest in hospitals and schools. Government-run no-fault insurance systems typically also remove the right of people injured in accidents to sue for the care and support they need to recover,” stated the IBC.

Government-run insurance has many risks

The non-partisan C.D. Howe Institute also recommends that Ontario avoid government-run systems like those in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

“There is a risk that at some point, governments will interfere through their agencies to pursue political goals that distort the price/value of the insurance product,” a statement from the group notes. “The future lies in being responsive to rapid changes in consumer needs, especially when it comes to features such as pricing and innovation.”

Goldberg says he has friends in Montreal who were seriously injured in auto accidents.

“They are only getting basic benefits because that is what is dictated by that province’s legislation, which relies on charts and averages to determine how much compensation people injured in accidents deserve,” he says.

“In Ontario, every case is different. People who retain a personal injury lawyer can win fair compensation, which is usually beyond what the insurance company wants to offer,” Goldberg adds.

He notes that personal injury lawyers are only paid if they reach a settlement, from which they take a certain percentage.

“This payment system allows for greater access to justice, as many people cannot afford to pay a lawyer upfront,” Goldberg says.