Auto

  • Daniel Strigberger
    insBlogs Auto Business Risks Legal Legislation / Regulation

    ONCA Sides with Lessor in Coverage Dispute

    June 14, 2018 by

    What happens when a Certificate of Automobile Insurance specifies that the policy includes coverages under certain endorsements, when those endorsements never make it onto the policy? The Certificate and OPCF Endorsements Ontario’s standard automobile policy (OAP1) offers a number of…

    Read more →
  • Daniel Strigberger
    insBlogs Auto Legal Specialty Risks

    Arbitrator: Intact has uber, uber, Uber Priority

    May 16, 2018 by

    Does Uber’s fleet policy with Intact provide primary accident benefits coverage to passengers who do not have their own auto insurance policies? The first arbitration decision on this issue says “yes”. Background In July 2016, FSCO approved a new standard…

    Read more →
  • Daniel Strigberger
    insBlogs Auto Business Risks Legal Legislation / Regulation

    The Wheels on the Bus, and other Regular Use Rhymes

    April 25, 2018 by

    Is a school bus company making a bus available for an employee driver’s regular use “at the time of the accident”, if she is not allowed to use the bus at the time of an accident? In TD Insurance v. Dominion,…

    Read more →
  • Daniel Strigberger
    insBlogs Auto Legal Legislation / Regulation

    ON Div Crt: No SABS for BC ATV MVA (and other abbreviations)

    April 10, 2018 by

    The Ontario Divisional Court has ruled that Ontario laws cannot be used to determine whether a specific vehicle needs to be insured, when an incident happens outside Ontario. Why is this Important? Automobile insurance is meant to insure automobiles and…

    Read more →
  • Daniel Strigberger
    insBlogs Auto Legal Legislation / Regulation

    Take Notice: There is no time for Notice

    March 28, 2018 by

    As Ontario’s auto insurance industry was waiting anxiously, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released an interesting decision on priority dispute notices to claimants. In Dominion v. Unifund, an accident benefits claimant was not notified of the priority dispute between…

    Read more →
  • insBlogs Auto

    What’s Driving Up Ontario Auto Insurance Rates?

    March 19, 2018 by

    Since becoming Premier, Kathleen Wynne focus on the auto insurance file has been to bring down rates. The government originally set a rate reduction target of 15%. After several years, the target was quietly abandoned. The government has done a lot of …

    Read more →
  • Steve Kee
    insBlogs Auto Legal

    Getting money BACK in the hands of those who need it most

    January 23, 2018 by

    The calendar has flipped to 2018, and in Ontario, we continue to debate fair auto insurance benefits. In December, Ontario announced its Fair Auto Insurance Plan. This announcement came after the government’s extensive consultations regarding David Marshall’s report entitled Fair…

    Read more →
  • insBlogs Auto

    We’ve Been Down This Road Before

    January 22, 2018 by

    Once again, Ontario has announced another package of auto insurance reforms. With a provincial election just months away, the Ontario government recently announced yet another plan to make auto insurance affordable for Ontario drivers. The plan is focu…

    Read more →
  • Peter Morris
    insBlogs Auto Business Risks Legislation / Regulation

    Having a full discussion with voters about Ontario automobile insurance pricing

    January 5, 2018 by

    A provincial election in Ontario is expected to take place within the next six months. In the lead up to that election, it is a safe bet that all three parties will make a number of promises as to how…

    Read more →
  • Steve Kee
    insBlogs Auto Fraud Legal Uncategorized

    IBC supports systemic change for Ontario auto insurance

    January 3, 2018 by

    Last month The Globe and Mail published a three part investigative series “Licensed to Bill”, describing a systemic problem with how injury claims are settled in public and private auto insurance markets in Canada. Insurers are eager for systemic change,…

    Read more →
  • Peter Morris
    insBlogs Auto Business Risks Business Strategy Technology

    The potential risks for insurers and consumers who spurn telematics

    December 21, 2017 by

    Not everyone has embraced telematics. It was reported the other day that at least one insurer has been told by its brokerage force that their customers are ‘not fans of telematics’. Carol Jardine, chief strategy office for Wawanesa, is quoted…

    Read more →
  • insBlogs Auto

    David Marshall’s report on auto insurance, Fair Benefits Fairly Delivered.

    December 6, 2017 by
    Back in April, David Marshall’s report on auto insurance, Fair Benefits Fairly Delivered was submitted to the Minister of Finance. What followed was a consultation process, in which that I participated. On December 5, 2017, the government announced their plan to address fraud and high premiums. I was relieved to see that Marshall’s recommendation to create an independent evaluation centre network in public hospitals was abandoned. This is an op-ed piece I wrote, which was published in the Toronto Star in October that dealt with this specific issue.

    Ontario’s crowded hospitals don’t need even more exams

    Attempts by the province of Ontario to fix auto insurance could well end up causing more harm than good to the health care system.
    Now, that’s not how it’s supposed to work. And that’s nobody’s intention. But we’d all have to live with the result.
    Here’s how we got here: The provincial government is considering a round of reforms for auto insurance in Ontario, unfortunately without basing those decisions on decent data, evidence or analysis. If adopted, the end result is going to send more people, not fewer, to hospitals, and all at a time when overcrowding is already at crisis levels in the province.
    We didn’t start out with a flawed system. Most people would agree that the introduction of no-fault auto insurance in Ontario was the right thing to do. Ontario drivers deserve an affordable system that provides coverage and protects accident victims and that’s what they got.
    It didn’t last. The insurance industry began to pressure government to make changes. Political pressure then led to successive governments adopting half-baked, knee-jerk solutions to auto-insurance delivery — anti-fraud measures were implemented, a licensing regime was created, a new dispute resolution system was put in place, basic accident benefit coverage was reduced.
    Since 2010, there have been more than 30 changes to auto insurance regulations, most, if not all, with the intention of lowering costs. Few people will suggest the system has actually been improved in that time.
    The government is now considering another round of reforms. This time it’s through David Marshall’s report on auto insurance, Fair Benefits Fairly Delivered.
    But these changes, if adopted, will be no more successful than the previous reforms. One of the most alarming is the suggestion that medical exams, when required after an accident — which are currently done in independent medical centres — should happen in hospitals.

    That is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Actually, it’s worse than that. It’s trying to fix one system while hurting a far more essential one. Current OHIP patients typically wait six to 30 months to see a specialist for an assessment. According to a recent story in the Toronto Star, it now takes 30.4 hours to be placed in an inpatient bed from the emergency department in the province. That’s the longest it’s ever been. There’s no way this helps with that problem.
    I had the lead in developing and introducing the system which saw independent medical assessments being done as part of auto insurance claims, back in 1994. In the beginning, some were conducted in hospitals.
    That didn’t last. While hospitals have different needs and resources, some could make better use of the space required, while others may not have had the patient volume to justify offering the assessments. Still more may have had trouble simply finding assessors. On the whole, hospitals decided on their own their resources were needed elsewhere. There’s no doubt that’s true.
    The other troubling recommendation the province is considering is a proposal to adopt a controversial Workplace Safety and Insurance Board model for auto insurance medical exams. The systems aren’t transferable. For example, the examiners in the WSIB system don’t appear as witnesses in disputes. But disputes are built into auto insurance claims. As a result, the proposed changes have the potential to add another layer of assessments and costs.
    Changes can and should be made to auto insurance in the province. It would be better for the province to focus on standards for those who conduct the independent examinations — something that has been recommended many times in the past. But that’s one change that’s never been made.
    The Marshall report indicates that this is “an opportunity to learn from past experience and fix the problems in the current auto insurance delivery system.”
    I don’t see that happening. Instead, I believe that implementing this report would repeat past errors. We’ve had enough of those already.
    Read more →
  • Andrew Lo
    insBlogs Auto Business Strategy Technology

    Optimizing Human-Digital Interaction is Key to InsurTech Success

    November 13, 2017 by

    The insurance industry is pouring billions of dollars into disruptive InsurTech development in the hopes of meeting rapidly changing customer expectations that have been moulded by the likes of Amazon, Apple, and Google. And, as these companies continue to change…

    Read more →
  • Daniel Strigberger
    insBlogs Auto Legal

    Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

    September 14, 2017 by

    The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.…

    Read more →