Changes to ICBC will ruin people’s lives
Crown corporation profits by denying, limiting claims, Daniel Balkaran says.
Regarding the NDP’s changes to ICBC:
1. Caps make injured people pay for their injuries Money is awarded to the injured party in compensation for his or her injuries caused by the fault of someone else. This award must be context-specific. For example: the fractured hand of a lawyer is worth substantially less than the fractured hand of a piano player.
2. Insurance companies profit by limiting claims Insurance companies get paid by denying or limiting claims. Their financial interests are adverse to those of claimants.
3. Insurance = Pooled funds to hedge against risk People who engage in an inherently risky activity, such as driving, agree to pool funds to hedge against said risk happening to them. If that risk materializes, they draw on the pooled funds in an amount proportional to the damage incurred. The point of insurance is to safeguard a future victim from loss. Capped insurance safeguards against catastrophic injury only.
4. Punish distracted drivers before capping injuries Car accident volume in British Columbia has increased by 23 per cent over the last several years because of distracted driving. Much of ICBC’s fiscal shortfall is squarely due to this accident volume increase.
5. Limit skyrocketing repair costs before capping injuries Twenty years ago replacing a damaged bumper cost $100 in parts and labour. Now, that same bumper has a camera and a computer in it, raising repair costs by many thousands of dollars.
6. ICBC layoffs should be tried before punishing victims In business, when liabilities exceed revenues over a sustained period, costs must be cut to prevent bankruptcy. Neither the NDP nor ICBC has discussed laying off nonessential ICBC staff to plug its fiscal hole. A private business would have no choice but to slim down. Damages caps reward ICBC inefficiency and guarantee that it will continue.
7. Judges can’t be wrong In our society, unless appealed, a judge’s decision is inherently correct. It can’t be wrong. ICBC’s campaign painting recent award increases for victims as being unjustified is disingenuous.
8. Damages caps are a Trojan horse: the CRT will ruin lives Recently, the government announced that all claims under $50,000 will be adjudicated by the Civil Resolution Tribunal. Fees and expenses (including medical experts) that the injured party can spend proving his or her injuries will be limited. Lawyer participation may be limited.
In my opinion, ICBC classifies most claims as being worth less than $50,000.
My law firm recently settled an injury claim for $390,000, in large part because our client’s injuries prevented him from working in the field he had gone to trade school for. A few months before trial ICBC’s offer was $30,000. ICBC did not understand his injuries because they were not incentivized to do so.
To prove the extent and value of his injuries, we had to hire his surgeon, various medical experts, a functional capacity evaluator, a vocational expert, and an economist to write expert reports. ICBC only paid out his award because we proved the extent of his injuries and their future impact on his life.
Under the new ICBC system, our client would likely have been forced to accept $30,000 in compensation. This result would have ruined his life. Condemned to part-time work in underpaying labour positions, his future existence would have been near the poverty line.
ICBC is not a neutral party. It profits by denying and limiting claims. These incentives make securing fair compensation inherently adversarial. By limiting litigation expenses, medical experts, and lawyer participation, the NDP will remove the adversarial process from claim adjudication. ICBC will have a free hand to limit the claims of most injury victims, not just those with so-called minor injuries. This legislation will ruin lives.