Catastrophic injuries are severe damage or impairments to your body, bones, person, or life. Go out. Support the injured. Keep insurers accountable. Fight for your rights. Lower car insurance costs. And, let’s limit ICBC’s unjust and unfair monopoly.

This is the truth of no-fault insurance. The tragic reality. The sad state of ICBC’s monopoly.

WHY CHANGE YOUR ICBC INJURY LAWYER:

1. The lawyer is not responsive to their client’s phone calls and/or emails.

2. The lawyer takes too long to conclude an injured victim’s file whether settlement or trial.

3. The lawyer is not willing to go to Trial and/or is inexperienced in it.

4. The lawyer undervalues an injured victim’s claim (e.g. asking the client to settle for much less than deserved).

The rumors were swirling. The party’s lack of popularity followed their candidates much like a typical Vancouver winter cloud. Much like Wilson, BC United ultimately deflated and drifted away into the abyss of irrelevance.

"The Court’s reference to awarding the plaintiff their “entire annual income for one or more years” has, unfortunately, sometimes been read as if it allows a court to arbitrarily assign an amount for the plaintiff’s loss. At trial, the defendant’s suggestion that an award of a year or two years’ salary would be appropriate appears to me to stem from a misunderstanding of Pallos. While a court can quantify the plaintiff’s damages for loss of future earning capacity in that way, it is required to carefully consider the evidence, and come to a fair assessment of the plaintiff’s loss."

A Mediation, for example, is an expensive process. Mediators regularly charge approximately $500.00 per hour which does not include the cost of the room rental, and transcribers/court reporters. Despite this, ICBC attends meretriciously: with no intentions of settling. At the same time, one must ask: why wouldn’t they abuse the system like this? They have, quite honestly, just hit the lottery with the inception of no fault insurance which promises them years and years of profits north of a billion dollars. And, as we all know, they are the only game in town; they have zero competition. Must be nice, right?

They dictate and take as they please.

As of November 2018, the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (“ICBC”) ICBC was prepared to defend the action on the basis of a global admission of liability. The insurer subsequently changed its approach, and decided to globally deny liability. The admission of liability on behalf of Mr. Nijjar was not a mistake of fact, but rather the result of a breakdown of communication between ICBC and defence counsel. ICBC and defence counsel then failed to bring their mistake to the attention of the plaintiff’s counsel in a timely manner.

On May 1, 2021, as you may know, ICBC’s new insurance regime came into force and effect. Concurrently, you may have received a $250.00 cheque in the mail and a 5%-15% reduction in your insurance costs.

A bribe, some may suggest.

Unsurprisingly, society tends to permit self-interest to dictate decisions. One example of this is no-fault. We as BC residents/citizens have had opportunities to fight against no-fault. However, most of BC was enticed, perhaps blinded, by the allure of lower insurance costs. As such, no-fault took force and effect.

For 3 individuals, the costs of no-fault have been crippling. These are their stories. This is the ugly truth of no-fault.

TRI-CITY LEGAL’s, Vic S. Maan interviewed by prominent and national legal publication, Canadian Lawyer Magazine, due to this experience and expertise.

In today’s blog, we discuss the recent case of Vespaziani v Lau, 2021 BCSC 1224, one of the first decisions to consider ICBC’s new, likely unconstitutional, three expert limit. Rather than bothering you with superfluous commentary, we rely heavily on the Trial Judges comments.

The reason for the adjournment can therefore be attributed to the defendants’ choice to delay conducting their examination for discovery of the plaintiff until February 25, 2021, about two months prior to the trial date, leaving very little time for follow-up document discovery. A trial date set for a case should not be adjourned simply because one side chooses to unduly delay discovery procedures, thereby limiting the time available for further discovery procedures.

Nine (9) Factors to help you host a legally safe party be it at a bar, restaurant, or home.