Ontario man faces bankruptcy after motorcycle crash | GTAMotorcycle.com

Ontario man faces bankruptcy after motorcycle crash

Froglet

Well-known member
Another Wynne-tario fiasco....
Lawsuits are going to be the new norm.

"Catastrophic definition needed update, public not told, lawyer says
The organization that oversees insurance matters in the province said the definition of catastrophic impairment was created in 1996 and "had become outdated."
"The revised definition, uses more current scientific and medical evidence to identify catastrophic impairments," said the Ontario Financial Commission of Ontario in a statement.
But the Bari family's lawyer says nothing was publicized about the new way of measuring catastrophic impairment. "


https://ca.news.yahoo.com/ontario-man-faces-bankruptcy-auto-093000482.html
 

pfbmgd

Well-known member
Lawyers getting richer .
 

mxs

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Terrible what has happened to the victim .... but the fact that the insurance gangster-like industry (under the lovely supervision of the government) were allowed to lower rates only at the expense of significantly lower payout in this particular case is unfortunately well known. Or should be well known to everyone who is buying insurance.

It's news that cops are also now pronouncing people on the side of the road ..... I guess they can literally do it all.
 

Froglet

Well-known member
As far as I can tell from my research, you can't even buy additional benefits to avoid such a situation, or am I wrong?
Any insurance specialists on this forum who could shed some light on this question?
 

TwistedKestrel

King of GTAM
Site Supporter
As far as I can tell from my research, you can't even buy additional benefits to avoid such a situation, or am I wrong?
Any insurance specialists on this forum who could shed some light on this question?
I believe you can. See: https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/brochures/Pages/brochure_changes10.aspx - there is an option for $1 mil combined coverage for non-catastrophic injuries. It's not buying back what you had before, but it would have covered the situation above.

It seems like we're starting to get the worst combination of average US accident coverage and expensive Ontario premiums.

However, the article doesn't touch on something but perhaps implies it - it was corresponding with their "personal injury lawyer". They can still potentially recoup some of their costs from the other party's liability insurance, right? Minus the $36K deductible and the supposed 20-30% take of the lawyer.
 
Last edited:

orangem

Member
Lawyers getting richer .
The unfortunate thing is all these changes means that one would need a personal injury lawyer for sure to get your proper compensation. I would imagine the lawyer will sue the driver and the insurance company. Then they will make a settlement. Who's getting richer? the lawyers for sure. I purchase the biggest umberella coverage nowadays cause all these changes just makes us more litigious.
 

boyoboy

Well-known member
Am I missing something? This guy clearly has catastrophic injuries. So he should be able to claim for whatever he needs. To me the lawyer representing him should have clearly and easily proved catastrophic injuries. The lawyer didn't prove this in court - when he should of.
I find the lawyer didn't do his job -and he should be sued for not doing his job with due diligence...

This "family" lawyer walked into the courtroom not aware of the law - and got caught with his pants down by not being prepared to prove catastrophic injury as req'd by the new law. This lawyer should have referred to a personal injuries specialist in this case. Now he's blaming the government for not holding his hand and telling him what the new laws are? wtf.

I think this lawyer is trying to cover up for his incompetence. get another lawyer dude, a GOOD lawyer.
 
Last edited:

Roadghost

Well-known member
I believe you can. See: https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/brochures/Pages/brochure_changes10.aspx - there is an option for $1 mil combined coverage for non-catastrophic injuries. It's not buying back what you had before, but it would have covered the situation above.

It seems like we're starting to get the worst combination of average US accident coverage and expensive Ontario premiums

Yeah, looks like they cut coverage in half in the most important areas. I haven't seen any drops in my premiums though. If anything my insurance went up. Stupid, stupid Wynne. Talk about screwing over the public.
 

TwistedKestrel

King of GTAM
Site Supporter
Am I missing something? This guy clearly has catastrophic injuries. So he should be able to claim for whatever he needs. To me the lawyer representing him should have clearly and easily proved catastrophic injuries. The lawyer didn't prove this in court - when he should of.
I find the lawyer didn't do his job -and he should be sued for not doing his job with due diligence...

This "family" lawyer walked into the courtroom not aware of the law - and got caught with his pants down. This lawyer should have referred to a personal injuries specialist in this case. Now he's blaming the government for not holding his hand and telling him what the new laws are? wtf.

I think this lawyer is trying to cover up for his incompetence. get another lawyer dude, a GOOD lawyer.
I think the issue is that "catastrophic" has a specific definition in this context, and this guy's injuries objectively no longer meet that definition. If it did, he would be getting compensation directly from insurance and not having to break out the lawyer (in theory. In practice, you still needed a lawyer anyway)

I will lazily drop this link for context, even though I haven't read any of it myself. http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/autoinsurance/si-report.html
 

boyoboy

Well-known member
I think the issue is that "catastrophic" has a specific definition in this context, and this guy's injuries objectively no longer meet that definition. If it did, he would be getting compensation directly from insurance and not having to break out the lawyer (in theory. In practice, you still needed a lawyer anyway)

I will lazily drop this link for context, even though I haven't read any of it myself. http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/autoinsurance/si-report.html
Read about the victims injuries and condition now - he HAS catastrophic injuries today. what happened is the lawyer walked into the courtroom without the required "scientific evidence" as req'd under the new law to prove catastrophic injury. he failed this guy miserably. and clearly wasn't aware of the proof req'd - THATS WHY HE WAS COMPLAINING ABOUT NO PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE NEW STANDARDS OF PROOF -the smhuck lawyer didn't know the new requirements and proves he didn't know with his complaint about it not being publicly announced. think about it.
 

boyoboy

Well-known member
Are you referring to a different article about the same family?
are insinuating this man doesn't have catastrophic injury. after spending 2 months or more in hospital? and now, according to the same articles - is now facing MILLIONS in rehab care? millions in rehab isn't catastrophic?
 

hedo2002

Well-known member
Site Supporter
I believe you can. See: https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/auto/brochures/Pages/brochure_changes10.aspx - there is an option for $1 mil combined coverage for non-catastrophic injuries. It's not buying back what you had before, but it would have covered the situation above.

It seems like we're starting to get the worst combination of average US accident coverage and expensive Ontario premiums.

However, the article doesn't touch on something but perhaps implies it - it was corresponding with their "personal injury lawyer". They can still potentially recoup some of their costs from the other party's liability insurance, right? Minus the $36K deductible and the supposed 20-30% take of the lawyer.
PI lawyers won't even consider your case at 20%, The rates very firm to firm, but the usually START at 33.3% upwards. I have heard of some in the 40% range. I got VERY lucky the firm I am now with split from a larger firm but agreed to keep my case at the original 30%, the "new rate" for anyone walking in the door is 40% now.

My last collision was 19 weeks ago this past Monday, Because I am self employed, the IRB, (Income Replacement Benefit) is a frustrating hassle to say the least, We have provided ALL company books, as well as had an accountant prepare a report for them. They said over a month ago they were forwarding our accountants report to their forensic accountant to "determine, if I qualify for IRB" I have yet to see a SINGE penny, I have worked (part time, less than 20% of former weekly revenue), exactly 2 weeks since the collision. I didn't buy the "extra" coverage meaning I am only entitled to $400 per week max. But that is a FAR cry from zero. Only thing that has kept me solvent so far is the money they gave me for my bike.

I couldn't go home for 32 days after my release from rehab, as I couldn't use crutches etc to get up the stairs at my residence. I had to stay with a friend who did all the cooking, cleaning etc etc. I am entitled to $36,000 in attendant care. Now they want HER tax returns for two years to confirm "she loss income" to look after me. Had I known they were going to pull that I would have, (as was my right), demand they put in a care facility that would have cost them thousands per day. NO instead I thought sure they will give my friend a $100 a day for all she did... Not freaking likely. If I ever have another collision screw them take EVERYTHING I am entitled to up front. I can understand them wanting to root fraud but when your hurt, last thing you need is to spend hours at your lawyer or on the phone fighting with dick wads who treat it like it was coming out of their pocket. I said to adjust how about YOU stop drawing a pay cheque until you start my IRB, I bet I would see the money pretty quick..lol

They are quick to take your premiums but NOT so quick to pay out.

Think about it how many of us can afford to be off work for 5 MONTHS with NO income??
 

Froglet

Well-known member
Thanks for sharing your experience Hedo2002, I've learned something from it.
If I'm ever in that position, (hope I never am), this forum is a wealth of information.
I've inquired about additional benefits to my broker and will probably buy more coverage, even though it's like pulling teeth to get help when you really need it.
 

SweetOnion

Well-known member
Hey guys... wow, I am going to catch up with all the reading on this thread later on.

I grew up with this guy, played hockey with him almost every season for about 10 years... went to highschool with... his family has had these old old bikes as restoration projects since we were as young as I remember... He is such as nice guy, was a real big guy and I don't remember him ever getting in a fight or being a bully. It's some rough ****... I feel like someone riding a bike like mine and doing stupid **** is far more deserving than someone riding like this guy here. I haven't talked to him in about 18 years but I think I will try to message his family. :/
 

Top Bottom