Ten Mistakes People Make When Dealing With Doctors After an Injury

If you have experienced a traumatic injury as the result of a motor vehicle accident or slip and fall you will no doubt end up seeing one or more doctors perhaps on multiple occasions. Here are 10 mistakes people who have experienced a traumatic injury make when dealing with tDoctor Meeting With Mature Male Patient In Exam Roomheir doctors.

1.    Failing to Seek Immediate Medial Attention After a Traumatic Event

The victim is always responsible for proving that he or she was injured in a particular incident.  Insurance companies and juries often believe that if you aren’t hurt badly enough to seek immediate medical attention, you aren’t hurt badly enough to deserve compensation.  Don’t ignore signs of pain, even small ones.  See a doctor as soon as possible, as minor injuries can always get worse.  You don’t want the first words the insurance lawyer says to the jury to be, “she didn’t even see a doctor for two weeks.”

2.    Failing to Fully Disclose Your Health History and Habits to Your Doctor

A health care provider will usually ask if you had any injury or sickness before your current problem.  It is important to be honest when answering this type of question.  Doctors use past medical history to diagnose and treat you.  Providing incomplete information can have an impact on the quality of the medical care you receive.  Concealing prior injury or sickness from your doctor will also hurt your legal case.  If you provide your doctors with incomplete information, their medical opinions could be rejected by insurance companies and juries.  The same advice goes for describing the accident.  Don’t tell your doctor the car was “totalled” if it was only scratched.  The insurance company’s lawyer will attack your credibility with that contradiction.

3.    Talking With Your Doctor About Lawsuits or a Lawyer’s Advice

A doctor’s job is to focus on your medical condition.  In order to do that job, a doctor does not have to know about your lawsuit or your lawyer.  Sharing your legal issues or concerns with a medicalcare provider should be unnecessary.  Many doctors do not want to be involved in a lawsuit.  If you tell a doctor he or she is treating an injury that is the subject of a lawsuit, it could affect their willingness to provide treatment.  Remember that whatever you say in confidence to a doctor is not confidential at all once you file a personal injury claim. The doctor’s notes will likely have to be shared with the insurance company’s lawyer and it help your case if they contain information you gave to your doctor about your lawsuit or your  lawyer’s advice.

4.    Missing or Showing up Late for Medical Appointments

Insurance companiesand juries get to see your medical records.  When you skip a medical appointment, your record just says “DNS”, which means “did not show”.  Excuses – no matter how valid – usually do not make it into the record.  More than one or two “DNS” entries could make it look like you were not committed to getting better.  Skipping medical appointments or showing up late could also irritate your doctor.  Irritated doctors do not make good witnesses for their patients.  If you need to cancel – call in advance and reschedule.  You don’t want the insurance company’s lawyer saying, “It must not have hurt that much, she didn’t even show up for her appointments.”

5.    Failing to Get Your Pain Accurately Documented in Medical Records

Insurance companies and juries may not believe that you are in pain just because you say so.  They need to read about your pain in your medical records.  When insurance companies and juries review your records, they will be looking to see how soon you reported pain after an injury and how long you continued to report that pain.  One effective way to help make sure your specific pain and limitations do make their way into a busy doctor’s chart is to write it out beforehand and give it to him at your office visit.  Again, don’t exaggerate. And keep a copy of your note to give to your lawyer.

6.    Failing to inform Your Doctor if Your Injury is Affecting Your Ability to Work

Insurance companies and juries may not believe that your injury affects your ability to work just because you say so.  If your injury is affecting your ability to work, it is important to mention such a problem to your health care provider.  Work problems caused by injury may be treatable and they should be noted in your medical records.  Again, keeping notes that you give to the doctor at your office visits is a good idea.

7.    Failing to Take Medications as Prescribed

There is a reason why doctors prescribe a particular type of medication for a particular time period.  You should follow your doctor’s recommendation until your doctor tells you something different.  If you think a medication is making your muscles ache or your stomach hurt, say so; side effects are not rare, and your doctor can usually switch you to another drug.  Don’t put yourself in the position where you have to admit that you chose not to follow your doctor’s advice.  This can be very harmful to your case.

8.    Stopping Medical Treatment Too Soon

Insurance companies and juries often believe if a person stops seeking medical treatment for an injury, the injury must be healed.  They also believe that significant gaps between treatments suggest that you healed from one injury and must have suffered a new one unrelated to the first.  If you have an injury that is affecting your ability to function, you should seek medical treatment until you are healed or until a doctor tells you that there is nothing more that can be done to improve your condition.  If you are still suffering and your doctor tells you to “come back as needed” or “call me if you have any problems”, you should ask how long you should wait to call if you continue to have the same level of pain and disability.

 9.    Failing to Follow Treatment recommendations Related to Depression or Anxiety

Often pain and/or disability trigger depression and/or anxiety.  Psychological conditions like depression and anxiety are just as real as broken bones.  They cannot be overcome without appropriate treatment.  A person who causes another person physical injury is also responsible for resulting psychological conditions.  Insurance companies and juries usually only compensate victims of injury-related depression and anxiety if those conditions are properly diagnosed and treated by medical professionals.

 10.    Failing to Keep a File

 It is important that your lawyer knows every medical care provider that you see after an injury.  It is also important that you keep track of all doctor orders, treatment referrals and/or work restrictions.  Keeping a file of all materials provided to you by health care providers and insurance companies will ensure that you can provide all necessary information to your lawyer at the appropriate time.

Conclusion

After a motor vehicle, accident or slip and fall it is important to consult a medical doctor if there is any chance that you have suffered an injury. Providing any doctors you see with complete and accurate information and following any treatment recommendations will not only increase your chances of maximum medical recovery it will also increase your  chances of maximizing your financial recovery in any subsequent law suit.

Edward (Ted) Masters is a personal injury lawyer in Ottawa with over 35 years of experience representing those seriously injured in car accidents. He can be contacted by his direct phone number, 613-566-2064, or by email at ted.masters@mannlawyers.com.

Advertisements

Slip And Fall Injuries

Winter has arrived and that means walking can be treacherous when sidewalks, roadways, and stairs are covered in snow and ice. Slips and falls can occur at any time of the year due to wet surfaces, poorly constructed steps, uneven sidewalks, and improperly maintained floors, but winter inevitably sees a spike in these types of injuries.slips trips and falls.jpg

If you are injured in a slip and fall you may have the right to receive compensation from the “occupier” of the property where you fell.

Occupier’s Obligation

An occupier’s obligation for the maintenance of private or commercial property in Ontario is governed by section 3(1) of the Occupier’s Liability Act which states as follows:

An occupier of premises owes a duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that persons entering on the premises, and the property brought on the premises by those persons are reasonably safe while on the premises.

Who is an occupier?

An “occupier” is defined by section 1 of the Occupier’s Liability Act as:

A person who is in physical possession of premises… or a person who has responsibility for and control over the condition of premises or the activities there carried on, or control over persons allowed to enter the premises, despite the fact that there is more than one occupier of the same premises.

This means that even though you may not own the property which you rent, you may be responsible for its maintenance and therefore may be liable in the event that someone is injured on those premises.

Under the Occupier’s Liability Act any entity that meets the definition of “Occupier”, (including municipalities, our work buildings, our friends’ and family’s homes, shopping malls, restaurants, and event venues) has a legal responsibility to make that sure that their premises are kept reasonably safe for visitors. Occupiers therefore need to be careful in keeping up their property. Liability in slip or trip cases turns on whether the occupier acted carefully so that slipping or tripping was not likely to happen. Another consideration is whether you were careless because you did not see or avoid the thing that caused you to fall.

Determining Liability

Here are some general rules to help determine whether an occupier was at fault for a slip and fall injury.

To be legally responsible for the injuries suffered from someone slipping or tripping and falling on their property, one of the following must be apply:

  1. The occupier or an employee must have caused the spill, worn or torn spot, or other slippery or dangerous surface or item to be present.
  2. The occupier or an employee must have known of the dangerous surface condition but done nothing about it.
  3. The occupier or an employee should have known of the dangerous surface because a “reasonable” person taking care of the property would have discovered it and removed or repaired it.

The last situation is the most common. Unfortunately is also less black and white than the first two because of those troublesome words “should have known.” Liability in these cases is often decided by common sense. Judges and juries determine whether the occupier or occupier of property was careful by deciding if the steps the occupier or occupier took to keep the property safe were “reasonable” in their opinion.

What Is “Reasonable”?

Success in many claims based on negligence depends on whether or not the defendant acted reasonably. The law focusses on whether the occupier made regular and thorough efforts to keep the property safe and clean in determining whether an occupier acted reasonably. Here are some initial questions the court will ask in determining whether a property or business occupier may be liable for slip or trip and fall injuries:

  • Did the injured party tripped over a torn, broken, or bulging area of carpet, floor, or ground, or slipped on a wet, icy, or loose area? If so had the dangerous condition been there long enough that the occupier should have known about it and fixed it?
  • Did the property occupier have a regular procedure for examining, maintaining, cleaning or repairing the premises? If so, what proof does the occupier have of this regular maintenance? Maintenance logs can be important evidence on this issue.
  • If the fall was caused by the presence of an object on the floor was there a safer place the object could have been located, or could it have been placed in a safer manner, without much greater inconvenience or expense to the property occupier?
  • Could a simple barrier have been created or a warning been given to prevent people from entering the area where there was a risk of slipping or tripping?
  • Did poor or broken lighting contribute to the accident?

If the answers to one or more of these questions favours the injured person then they may have a good claim for compensation. However, the court must still consider whether their own carelessness contributed in any significant way to the accident.

Preventing Liability

Whether an occupier took reasonable care in the circumstances can vary on a case by case basis. For example, the standard of care required can be different for occupiers of residential property and occupiers of commercial property. Since the standard of care of occupiers is that of reasonableness and not perfection not every case of a slip and fall causing injury will necessarily give rise to a successful lawsuit. Where an occupier can show that it took reasonable steps to prevent the harm, it may be absolved of all liability and will not be required to pay any damages.

Home Occupiers

A home occupier should take the following steps to reduce the risk that they will be held liable if someone falls on their property:

  • quickly clean up spills
  • fix damaged railings and steps
  • ensure proper lighting is in place
  • clear snow and ice from sidewalks and areas leading to entrance of the premises
  • remove icicles
  • sand or salt icy or snowy areas as frequently as necessary
  • ensure you have sufficient policy limits in your home owner’s policy (speak to your broker)

Commercial Property Occupiers

In addition to the measures outlined above for home owners, commercial occupiers should also do the following:

  • erect ‘wet floor’ signs and other notices to warn patrons of potential hazards
  • close off sections of your premises if they pose a potential threat to patrons
  • implement inspection protocols
  • keep maintenance records
  • hire and train maintenance staff
  • alternatively hire an independent contractor and specifically outline the terms of the contractor’s responsibilities (although this does not necessarily discharge an occupier/occupier from its responsibilities – consult a lawyer to determine what should be in this contract)

Injured Parties Carelessness

In almost every slip or trip and fall case, the court must decide whether the injured party’s carelessness contributed to the accident. The rules of “comparative negligence” help measure their reasonableness (or lack thereof) in going where they did, in the way they did, just before the accident happened. There are some questions the court will ask the injured party about their conduct:

  • Did they have a legitimate reason for being where the dangerous area was?
  • Were they doing anything that distracted them from paying attention to where they were going?
  • Were they running, jumping, or fooling around in a way that made falling more likely?
  • Would a careful person have noticed the dangerous spot and avoided it, or walked carefully enough not to slip or trip?
  • Were there any warnings that the spot might be dangerous?If it is found that the injured party’s careless conduct contributed to the cause of their slip and fall the amount of compensation they are entitled to receive will be reduced according the their share of fault or liability. Courts have reduced a plaintiff’s damages if they were not wearing their prescription glasses, were in a rush, were intoxicated, had their hands full or were otherwise distracted when the incident occurred.

In order to reduce the risk of a fall or having you damages reduced you should do the following:

  • wear footwear that is suitable for the prevailing conditions (i.e. snow boots in winter)
  • follow any posted signage regarding unsafe areas or areas to avoid
  • use handrails and other safety devices that are available
  • take the safest route and avoid areas marked as slippery or wet
  • pay attention to your surroundings (don’t text and walk, etc.)

Prepare A Summary Of The Occurrence

If you have been injured in a slip and fall you should record the following information as soon as possible and keep a record of the following information in order for your lawyer to be in the best position to determine your chances of success and the amount of your potential damages:

  1. Prepare a general summary of the event including the time, date, cause and precise location of incident
  2. Take photographs of the general location of your fall and the hazard that caused you to trip or slip as well as of your injuries – a picture is worth a thousand words!
  3. Preserve the footwear you were wearing –take photos of the footwear including the soles
  4. If weather was a factor, such as a slip and fall on ice, note the weather conditions leading up to and at the time of the fall
  5. Report the incident to the property owner or property management immediately
  6. Get the name of the owner of the premises and if possible the name of any contractors hired to maintain the property
  7. Submit an incident report, leave a copy with the owner and keep a copy
  8. Get the names and contact information of any witnesses
  9. Make a list of the injuries you suffered as a result of the fall
  10. Keep a record of the treatment(s) you have received and are receiving for your injuries
  11. Keep a record of the name(s) of health care providers you are seeing for your injuries
  12. Keep a record of any out-of-pocket expenses associated with your injury such as mileage and parking costs for medical appointments, medication costs, physiotherapy, massage therapy costs, etc. and keep the receipts
  13. Keep a record of missed work or income opportunities

Consult A Lawyer ASAP

It is important that you consult a lawyer as soon as possible after an incident resulting in injuries from a slip or fall.

Since what is required to meet the standard of reasonableness will depend on the circumstances of each case it is best if you contact a lawyer promptly so that they can carry out the necessary investigation to determine whether the occupier failed to meet its standard of care in your particular situation. In addition you will want to retain your right to sue the occupier(s) and there are strict notice deadlines that apply in some situations. Your lawyer can insure that any deadline that applies to your case is met.

Conclusion

Slips and falls can cause serious injuries such as broken bones and head trauma that may prevent you from returning to work and require medical treatment. Compensation for pain and suffering and loss of income as well as other heads of damages may be available to you if you have suffered serious injuries as a result of a slip and fall incident. A prompt and thorough investigation of the circumstances of your fall will increase your chances of being successful in seeking compensation.

Ines Jelic is a personal injury lawyer in Ottawa and can be contacted by her direct phone number, 613-566-2055, or by email at ines.jelic@mannlawyers.com.

 

 

 

Court Of Appeal Clarifies Collateral Benefits Issues

There has been a steady reduction in the damages that innocent motor vehicle accident victims recover from the at fault driver. The Ontario Government, working with the insurance industry, has been passing more and more restrictive laws and regulations to cut down on damage awards to innocent accident victims. The Ontario Court of Appeal recently released two decisions that will have a significant negative impact on the amount of money innocent car accident victims will be able to recover from at fault drivers.

COA1In El-Khodr v. Lackie the innocent driver, Mr. El-Khodr, was seriously injured when the tow truck he was operating was rear-ended. Following a trial the jury awarded him damages totaling $2,931,006.

The trial judge had instructed the jury to regard the Ontario Drug Benefit Plan as a “contingency” meaning that it was not certain that the plan would still exist in 2028, the year in which Mr. El-Khodr would turn age 65 and first qualify for it. The Court of Appeal held that judge should have instructed the jury to award damages based on the law as it existed and that the Ontario Drug Benefit Plan should not be considered a “contingency”. Mr. El-Khodr would be eligible under the plan at age 65, and therefore the at fault party’s insurance company should only be required to pay for Mr. El-Khodr drug expenses until he turned 65.

Mr. El-Khodr qualified for life long benefits from his own insurance company (so called “collateral benefits”) because he was found to have suffered “catastrophic” injuries. The trial judge did not order Mr. El-Khodr to turn over (assign) these future benefits to the defendant’s insurance company. Several previous cases had required a strict “matching” between the types of damage recovered by the innocent party and the specific type collateral benefit he received before there could be such an assignment. The questions the jury had been asked to answer about the Mr. El-Khodr future damages did not identify each type of damage and the amount awarded for it. This meant that the required “matching” of the damages awarded at trial and future collateral benefits was not possible in this case.

The Court of Appeal held that in the case of Mr. El-Khodr it was not necessary to match both the specific kind of damages awarded by the jury with a specific kind of future collateral benefit. It was also not necessary to match the time when the future damage expense would be incurred with when the collateral insurance benefit would be available (“strict qualitative and temporal matching requirements should not be applied”). It held that “matching” was not necessary because Mr. El-Khodr was entitled to his other future collateral benefits for life. This meant that the jury’s damage award included all future expenses that would be paid by Mr. El-Khodr’s own insurance company as collateral benefits. This meant that if there was no assignment of the future benefits which Mr. El-Khodr received for medication, assistive devices and professional services, he would be over-compensated. His receipt of both damages after the trial and future collateral benefits for the same expenses would constitute double recovery.  

The Court of Appeal ordered that any collateral benefits received by Mr. El-Khodr for future medication, assistive devices, professional services (psychological, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, massage therapy, kinesiology/ personal training, case management), and travel to medical or other specialist were assigned to the at fault driver’s insurance company.

 The assignment of future collateral insurance benefits will significantly reduce the “net” amount of money Mr. El-Khodr and all other innocent accident victims will recover from all sources. Instead of using future collateral benefits to cover these expenses he will have to give the money to the at fault driver’s insurance company.

In Cobb v. Long Estate, Mr. Cobb suffered chronic pain that prevented him from working and performing household tasks. A jury awarded $220,000 in damages but after deducting the collateral benefits Mr. Cobb received from his own insurance company and the statutory deductible for damages for pain and suffering, the judge calculated a final judgment amount of $34,000.

Prior to the trial Mr. Cobb had entered into a final lump sum settlement with his own insurance company of his collateral benefits  including his Income Replacement Benefit. The correspondence between the insurer and Mr. Cobb’s lawyer regarding the settlement did not indicate that any portion of the $130,000 settlement was being made for any reason other than to compensate for his income loss.  The court decided that the entire $130,000 was to be deducted from the damages the jury awarded Mr. Cobb for loss of both past and future income.

The Court of Appeal also said that it was proper to deduct the entire $9,150 that Cobb received from his own insurance company for housekeeping from the jury’s awards for past and future loss under this heading of damages. It found that there was no reason to distinguish between past and future losses where the insurance company had not done so in the settlement.

In order to ensure that appropriate “matching” of benefits and assignment occurs plaintiffs’ lawyers must present their clients’ damage claims according to the categories of collateral benefits available form their own insurance companies. They should make one claim for past and future losses that have collateral insurance coverage and a separate claim for any past and future losses that do not have other coverage. In cases involving non-catastrophic injuries, the presentation of the claim should account for the both the monetary and time limits on benefits available to their client under their own insurance policy.

Edward (Ted) Masters is a personal injury lawyer in Ottawa with over 35 years of experience representing those seriously injured in car accidents. He can be contacted by his direct phone number, 613-566-2064, or by email at ted.masters@mannlawyers.com.

Court Of Appeal Clarifies Pre-Judgment Interest Rate

Insurance companies use their long experience paying out claims, including the payment Appealof pre-judgment interest, in setting premium rates. Premiums are based on the pre-judgment interest rate in force at the time they are paid. It can take several years for a complex motor vehicle accident that results in serious injuries, to wind its way through the litigation process. During that time period the insurance company has the benefit of the investments it made with the at fault driver’s insurance premium. It seems unfair to penalize an injured party by retroactively applying a lower interest rate to their damages for pain and suffering when the insurer reasonably expected to pay a higher rate when it set and collected the premium from the at fault driver.

In 2015 we published several blogs on the interest rate that should apply to claims for pain and suffering in motor vehicle accident cases. Our most recent blog on August 24, 2015 ended with the Statement that “we will have to await the decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for a final determination of this question.” Well the Court of Appeal has now spoken.

In El-Khodr v. Lackie the innocent driver, Mr. El-Khodr, was seriously injured when the tow truck he was operating was rear-ended. Following a trial the jury awarded Mr. El-Khodr damages totaling $2,931,006 of which $89,167 was pre-judgment interest on general damages for his pain and suffering. The trial judge had decided that prejudgment interest on the general damages should be calculated at 5 per cent (the rate that was in effect prior to January 1, 2015 when the pre-judgment interest rate was reduced by an amendment to s. 258.3(8.1) of the Insurance Act).

The Court of Appeal decided that the reduced interest rate was effective from the day the amendment to s. 258.3(8.1) of the Insurance Act came into force. The reduced rate applied to all actions that had been started before the amendment. As a result, the interest rate to be applied on Mr. El-Khodr’s general damages was 2.5 per cent. As a result of the reduction in the interest rate the interest on his general damages should have been $44,583 and not the $89,167 awarded by the trial judge.

In Cobb v. Long Estate, the plaintiff Cobb suffered chronic pain that prevented him from working and performing household tasks. A jury awarded him $220,000 in damages but after deducting other insurance benefits Cobb had received and a statutory deductible that applied to general damages, the judge calculated a final judgment amount of $34,000.

When addressing the issue of pre-judgment interest on general damages the trial judge did not decide whether the amendment in s. 258.3(8.1) which reduced the rate of prejudgment interest for pain and suffering from five percent applied retrospectively. Instead, the trial judge exercised the discretion he was given by s. 130 of the Courts of Justice Act and set the prejudgment interest rate at three percent.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge properly exercised the discretion he had to set the rate of pre-judgment interest payable on the general damages awarded to Cobb and did not apply the lower statutory rate.

Edward (Ted) Masters is a personal injury lawyer in Ottawa with over 35 years of experience representing those seriously injured in car accidents. He can be contacted by his direct phone number, 613-566-2064, or by email at ted.masters@mannlawyers.com.

Changes to the Ontario Insurance Act that will directly impact on your Auto Insurance Benefits – Consumers Beware

Auto Insurance

Effective June 1, 2016, the Ontario Government has introduced changes to the automobile insurance system which will greatly affect the coverage consumers select and the price they will pay for auto insurance.   Many of these changes affect the statutory accident benefits that a person will receive if they have been injured in an automobile accident regardless of who is at fault.   Some of these benefits have been reduced and some options for increased coverage have been eliminated or changed.

Accordingly, it is absolutely vital for an individual to speak with their auto insurance broker to determine what the best coverage is for them and in many cases the increased coverage can often be provided at a minimal cost.

These changes will apply only to auto insurance policies issued or renewed after June 1, 2016.

Previously, medical and rehabilitation benefits for non-catastrophic injuries (less serious) provided a maximum of $50,000.00 in benefits with an additional $36,000.00 available for attendant care if deemed necessary.   Under the June 1, 2016 changes these benefits have been combined and reduced to $65,000.00 total.    A party can now choose to increase the benefits to a total of $136,000.00.

The 2016 changes also effectively cut in half coverage available to those with catastrophic injuries (serious brain injuries/spinal cord injuries).   Prior to June 1, 2016, the limit for medical care and rehabilitation and attendant care was 1 million dollars each.   Under the new policy these benefits have been combined and reduced to 1 million dollars in total.    An insured can now choose to add on an additional 1 million dollars for a total of 2 million dollars available for catastrophic injuries.

Disability claim

Prior to June 1, 2016, if an individual is unable to work they can receive income replacement benefits reflecting 70% of one’s gross income up to a maximum of $400.00 per week.   The new policy does not cause any changes.  However, an individual can now choose to increase their weekly limit of income replacement benefits (if eligible) to $600.00; $800.00; or $1,000.00 per week.

Other benefits/coverage including housekeeping and home maintenance expenses, death and funeral benefits and dependent care benefits can all be increased or modified for additional premiums.

It is important to speak to your auto insurance broker to determine what the best option for you is and how much any additional premiums will be.

It may very well be that a very minor increase in premium can afford you significant increased benefits.   If no changes are made one’s insurance, coverage will automatically default to the current new low standard benefits.

Changes to Statutory Accident Benefits

In an effort to reduce insurance premiums, the Government has promised to make significant changes to statutory accident benefits.

The changes include:

  1. An amendment to the test for catastrophic impairment;
  2. Including attendant care services with the $1 million medical and rehabilitation benefit for catastrophic impairments;
  3. Reducing the standard duration of medical and rehabilitation benefits from 10 years to five years for all claimants except children; and,
  4. Eliminating the six month waiting period for non-earner benefits, and limiting the duration of non earner benefits to two years post accident ;

Tort claims

In addition to the above Statutory Accident Benefit changes, the Government has indicated that it will propose amendments to the Insurance Act, these amendments are as follows:

  1. An adjustment to the deductible on awards for pain and suffering damages to reflect inflation and future changes in inflation;
  2. An adjustment to the monetary thresholds beyond which the tort deductible does not apply to reflect inflation.

These changes will serve to increase the $30,000.00 deductible introduced in 2003.

The full list of proposed changes to both SABS and Tort Claims can be found at http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/ontariobudgets/2015/papers_all.pdf.

With the amounts available to victims of motor vehicle accidents set to be dramatically reduced, it is important to ensure that those involved in accidents receive the full amount they are entitled to. A lawyer familiar with the legislation can help you make sure you receive your entitlement.

If you have been injured in a motor vehicle accident, please feel free to contact a member of the Mann Lawyers personal injury team at 613 722 1500.