Insurance

Published on: November 14, 2023

Adverse Cost Insurance for Personal Injury Cases in Ontario

Over the past decade, personal injury lawyers have seen an explosion of a new insurance product offered to their law firms and to their personal injury clients. It’s called Adverse Cost Insurance or After-The Event Insurance.

How does it work and what does it do?

Adverse Cost Insurance or After-The Event Insurance serves to protect a Plaintiff from an adverse cost award following an unsuccessful trial. At trial, if a party loses, the Judge will generally order that the losing party pay the winning party’s legal fees. Those legal fees, especially after a trial can be very high. This insurance product is there to cover all, or part, of those legal fees which the losing party is ordered to pay by the Judge.

What are the benefits to this insurance?

In theory, the insurance will pay for part, or all of the legal costs if you’re unable to do so on your own.

Let’s imagine a scenario whereby a Plaintiff in a car accident case loses his/her case. After the lengthy trial, the Judge dismisses the Plaintiff’s case, and orders that the Plaintiff pay the Defendant’s legal costs in the amount of $500,000. This is entirely possible. In fact, it recently happened in the case of Belton v. Spencer. In that case, Belton sued Spencer for damages as against Spencer as a result of an accident that he sustained while walking Spencer’s horse .

Following a trial lasting over eight weeks, Belton’s action was dismissed as against Spencer. The Judge ordered that the Plaintiff Belton to pay $350,000 in legal fees plus HST, and $74,472.52 in disbursements, for a total of $469,972.52 to the Defendant Spencer. Ouch!

Continue reading →

Published on: November 2, 2023

Unavoidable and Inevitable Accidents In Ontario

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

When a car accident happens, you would like to think that the insurance company insuring the at fault driver will pay out on a meritorious claim.

That makes sense.

But more often that not, insurance companies try to avoid (putting it kindly) their obligation to pay out on such claims. They will leave no stone unturned in an attempt to get out of paying. Smart tactic when it works. But breaches all conventional norms of decency when it fails. But a little egg on the face of an insurer isn’t a new thing.

One of the ways that they can avoid paying out on claims is by attempting to nullify the insurance for the Defendant at fault driver.

They can do so in a number of ways.

One of the ways is to declare that the at fault Defendant driver didn’t have any sort of insurance coverage in the first place.

This happens more often that you would think. During the Pandemic, many Ontario drivers stayed at home on account of COVID and the lockdowns. These motorists had cars, which weren’t being used at all. They were just sitting in the garage, all the while the motorist was paying insurance premiums. Many of these motorists temporarily cancelled their car insurance during the Pandemic to save a few dollars. This makes perfect sense.

But the problem became that many of these drivers who removed coverage, forgot to reactivate their coverage when the world opened up again. The result was that they thought that they were driving around with proper insurance coverage, but in reality; they were not.

In that example, the insurance coverage is well within their rights to deny coverage for a car accident which took place when there was a temporary hold, or removal, of the insurance coverage. You don’t get coverage for free.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 11, 2023

Suing your Mom or Dad or another family member in a car accident case

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

When I was a young personal injury lawyer, an odd case appeared on my desk.

The Plaintiff was an older automobile executive, who broke 3 vertebrae, torn his rotator cuff and fractured his skull in a car accident.

The injuries were quite significant. They prevented the client from returning to work, or engaging in his usual personal care and recreational activities. His life would be forever changed as a result of the car accident.

What was odd was that the car accident was a single car accident. The client was a passenger in the vehicle. The driver had lost control, drove the car off the shoulder of the road, and flipped the vehicle into a ditch along a deserted country road. I imagine that the car accident could have been even more serious had there been more vehicles involved.

So, in that case, the passenger would sue the driver for having lost control and flipped over the vehicle.

In this case, the driver was the client’s own daughter.

Isn’t that strange. A father, needing to sue his own daughter for his personal injuries arising from a car accident. It’s not like the daughter intentionally tried to flip over the vehicle. It was, by all accounts; an accident.

But how does that work, and what are the ramifications of a father, having to sue his own child for damages in a personal injury case? Can the daughter go to jail? Will her credit rating be ruined forever? Does she need to hire a personal injury lawyer to defend her claim? Will she need to go to trial and square off against her own father in open Court? Will this father/daughter personal injury case get really nasty such that Dad will take away Daughter’s TV and cell phone privileges?

Continue reading →

Published on: April 21, 2023

Damages in Personal Injury Cases (Ontario)

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

The entire field of personal injury law is rather effective at making sure that accident victims aren’t unjustly enriched by the benefits or moneys which they receive in their case.

Cases have been fought all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada to make sure that innocent accident victims aren’t getting their cake, and eating it too.

Insurance companies will fight tooth and nail to make sure that Plaintiffs don’t double dip.

It can be hard for innocent accident victims to understand that laws against double dipping exist. Many think that legal remedies are an all you can eat buffet. Unfortunately for Plaintiffs, they are not.

The laws surrounding remedies, damages and set offs exist because at law, an accident victim is not allowed to be put in a better position post accident, than they were pre-accident. The laws surrounding compensation exist to make a person whole again; and not to put them in a better position than they were pre-accident.

The accident should not be seen as a monetary windfall for the Plaintiff. It should be seen as a means to an end to make them whole for their past losses, and those losses moving forward.

Certainly, an insurer will have a more conservative valuation of what those losses are. While a Plaintiff will have a more aggressive valuation. Where that number lies is often somewhere in the middle. But, it’s important to state that a Plaintiff can only be awarded what’s recoverable at law.

Many clients want to see the Defendant suffer. They want to see the Defendant go to jail, or become their butler until the end of time as compensation for their damages. Plaintiffs want to own the Defendant’s home, all of their prized possessions, and receive a public apology in four national newspapers. The law just doesn’t work this way. A Judge cannot sent a Defendant to jail in a civil personal injury case. The only thing that the Judge can do is order the Defendant pay the Plaintiff compensation within the framework of the law.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 2, 2023

New Disability Bill May Have Unintended Consequences which will benefit Insurance Companies

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

This is an example of how governments with the best intentions can still screw things up.

It’s quite noble for the federal government to want to help people with disabilities make ends meet. Get people with disabilities more money in their pockets so that they can pay their bills, live independently, and with dignity.

So, the Federal Government unanimously passed Bill C-22 “An Act to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of persons with disabilities by establishing the Canada disability benefit and making a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act”. Yes, that is the full legal name of the Bill because legislators and lawyers tend to get oh so creative and descriptive when naming a new Bill!

The Bill does not go into specifics about how much people would receive. Nor does it go into specifics about how you would qualify for the benefit.

But it does detail that if you qualify for assistance, you would receive money in the form of a disability benefit.

People should know that receiving money, from any source has consequences. There are never “no strings attached”; especially when receiving money from the Government.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 28, 2022

An Arborist, a Can of Beer and a Chainsaw

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

Sounds like a typical law school fact pattern for a tort case.

A property owner retains an arborist to do a routine pruning job on a set of Norwich Maple Trees in his yard.

The arborist advertises that he is both “licensed” and insured.

Upon attending at the job site, the arborist begins to unload his equipment from his van. It includes all of the normal stuff which any arborist would carry: spikes for climbing trees, ropes, counter weights, pylons and chain saws etc. But is also includes something which you shouldn’t find on any job site; an open container of alcohol; in this case a tall boy of beer.

Having an open can of beer may not seem like a big deal. The general labourers there to help the arborist tell the property owner that having a beer on the job site isn’t a problem; and that they do it all the time. They tell the property owner that this is just the way that the licensed arborist works. He needs beer to concentrate and do his job. They are trying to pass this off like it’s all normal.

The notion that a man climbing 20+ feet in the air; with a large gas powered chainsaw; needs to be fueled by alcohol isn’t normal whatsoever.

Yet, this is what the arborist and his friends tried to convey to the property owner.

In case you are wondering, that property owner was me. And I’m a personal injury lawyer. And I wasn’t having anything of it.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 15, 2022

Innocent Accident Victims Play Nice. Most Insurers Don’t.

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

The majority of my clients are first time litigants:

It’s their first time retaining a personal injury lawyer; or retaining a lawyer at all
It’s their first time suing
It’s their first experience with the legal system
It’s their first time getting really hurt and needing to do something about it from a legal perspective
It’s their first time getting denied by an insurance company
It’s their first time feeling gaslit by an insurance company
It’s their first time participating in sworn statements, an examination for discovery, medico-legal assessments, mediation, having surveillance conducted on them, Pre-Trial, Trial and all of the other things which go hand in hand with personal injury cases

The parties which my clients sue or seek benefits from are large and sophisticated insurance companies. This is not their first rodeo. They are well versed in the dark arts of litigation. Strategically defending lawsuits is what they do well.

Insurance companies know what they are up against. They are facing off against for the most part, unsophisticated accident victims who are hurt or injured. The Plaintiffs are new to litigation and all of the ups and downs which it presents. Insurance companies know how to say the right things because they have experience. Having their lawyers say “healing words” to appease a Plaintiff; or say all the right things to gloss over a terrible sequence of events is less expensive than paying out an award for damages.

An apology costs n0thing. Stating condolences for the loss of a loved one costs nothing as well.

But paying out of a claim costs the price of said claim.

There is a quantifiable economic difference between the two which insurance companies and their lawyers know all too well. Why pay out on a claim when you don’t have to? Why pay more on a case when you don’t have to? It makes financial sense. If an insurance company either liked your claim, or wanted to get you the compensation you deserve; you would have received that compensation by now.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 29, 2022

Getting paid interim benefits after you get hurt or seriously injured in Ontario

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

There are serious misconceptions of how people get paid, or receive benefits after they’ve been seriously hurt or injured in an accident.

You’ve likely heard stories of insurance companies paying for an accident victim’s lost wages, treatment costs or even getting them a modified vehicle or modified home before their case even settles.

Some of these things might be true. Some of these things might be false.

At the end of the day, it’s this sort of misinformation which creates large scale confusion as to what benefits get paid, and what benefits don’t get paid before a case even settles.

Goldfinger Injury Lawyers would like to set the record straight with this instalment of the Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 21, 2022

Car Insurance and the Ottawa Freedom Convoy Protest

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

I was talking to my father about the Ottawa Freedom Convoy Protests and what to do about them. This was before PM Trudeau announced the that his government would be implementing the *Emergencies Act and before the police finally did some real police work and cleared out most of the trucks and protesters.

*Note: Canada was NOT facing a National Emergency when PM Trudeau accounced that his government would be implementing the Emergencies Act. The protests at the border crossings in Coutts Alberta and Windsor Ontario had long been cleared up. While there were smaller protests happening sporadically across Canada; these protests did not amount to a NATIONAL EMERGENCY. The protests in Ottawa amounted to a localized emergency isolated to a few blocks of downtown Ottawa. While these protests may (or may not) have presented real or potential security issues; these were localized issues which the municipal police and provincial police ought to have dealt with. But they had a really hard time dealing with them for reasons that I, nor will many Canadians really understand. Did they not see this coming!?!?!?!?! Had they not seen a protest before? Why were they so unprepared and so unwilling to act? How is it that the G-20 Toronto protests, Black Lives Matters protests and any Indigenous protests (BC, Belleville, near any pipeline) get cleared up so quickly by police (often using force), yet for this protest it seemed like authorities rolled out the red carpet to the protesters? But that’s a topic for another day, perhaps from a Civil Rights Lawyer.

Back to the topic of what amounts to be a National Emergency and whether or not the Ottawa Truck Protest qualified as such. The definition of “National Emergency” under the Emergencies Act is as follows:

National emergency

3 For the purposes of this Act, a national emergency is an urgent and critical situation of a temporary nature that

(a) seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it, or
(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada

and that cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.

The Ottawa Police Service and the Ontario Provincial Police ought to have been able to deal with this situation without the implementation of the Emergencies Act. Implementing the Emergencies Act should only be done when facing a real National Emergency. While it’s embarrassing that the capital city of a G7 nation can be blockaded by a few trucks, this is not a National Emergency. This is a time for the Ottawa Police, the OPP and the National Capital Commission to reflect on the lack of preparedness, lack of urgency and lack of security in Ottawa. It should have never reached a point whereby Ottawa was blockaded for 3 weeks. But I digress back to topics as they relate to personal injury law and car insurance to keep things on point.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 2, 2021

Hurdles to your Long Term Disability Case

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

Cases are built upon evidence.

Lawyers will try to highlight certain pieces of evidence in order to better suit, or to create a narrative which suits their client’s best interests.

It’s up to a Judge or a Jury to sift through the evidence in order to determine where the truth.

While lawyers can spin evidence any way they want, there are sometimes objective facts which simply cannot be spun.

With today’s instalment of the Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog, we will try to highlight hurdles which our personal injury lawyers have seen in long term disability cases. Sometimes these hurdles can be cleared. Other times, these hurdles cannot be overcome and really hurt a long term disability case.

Long Term Disability Hurdle #1: The Plaintiff as returned to work. There is nothing wrong with returning to work, so long as you tell your lawyer and don’t hide it. In fact, the Plaintiff has a legal obligation to mitigate his/her damages, which means trying to return to work. We tell our clients that there’s nothing better for a case than a failed return to work attempt. It shows that the Plaintiff tried to mitigate his/her damages by attempting to return to work and that the return to work failed because their injury/disability is bonafide and very serious. If a Plaintiff does not attempt to return to work, the insurer will certainly question why not. If there are notes in the doctor’s records which suggest that a return to work is possible yet was not attempted; the insurer will insist that the Plaintiff has not even attempted to mitigate despite a doctor suggesting that a return to work is possible. Not trying to return to work can delegitimize a Plaintiff’s injury or disability (if a return to work is on the table). If a Plaintiff returns to work without telling their lawyer, or is working under the table for cash it looks like the Plaintiff is trying to pull a fast one on the insurer. This will be frowned upon. This is why it’s so important to have good communication with your personal injury lawyer and fill him/her in on the significant changes in your lifestyle or health. You both want to be on the same page. If your lawyer is advocating for your disability into the future, yet you returned to work months ago; it’s not a good look for your long term disability case.

Continue reading →