It may be a struggle for Lindsay Lohan to be insured on movie sets given her troubled history, but it seems the actress, despite multiple run-ins with the law and multiple auto-related incidents, is still somehow able to get auto insurance.
Lohan was arrested in New York City on Wednesday for leaving the scene after allegedly clipping a 34-year-old chef while driving a 2010 black Porsche Cayenne SUV in an alleyway between two hotels.
In June, Lohan’s Porsche crashed into a dump truck on Malibu’s Pacific Coast Highway, and was totaled.
In March, Lohan reportedly attempted to maneuver a Porsche in a crowd of paparazzi in Hollywood and hit the manager of a popular VIP hangout.
In 2007, she received two DUIs in the span of three months. In addition, the actress’s name routinely pop up in association with dings, bangs, bumps and law breaking – including a spin in her Porsche this past July in which she tapped the back of a silver mustang, getting pulled over by police for running a stop sign in Beverly Hills, and reports that she pulled her high-powered Maserati out of her West Hollywood apartment building and ran a red light before running into a stroller being pushed by a nanny.
But given this history, how on earth is Lohan still able to get motor vehicle insurance, and what kind of premium must she be paying?
“Lindsay’s auto insurance policy is likely to be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, not to mention that some insurance providers in California may require a bond,” according tp a spokesperson for AutoInsuranceQuery.com, Roger Brideaux.
source
Thứ Bảy, 30 tháng 11, 2013
Michigan Drivers to Test Crash-Avoidance System
. 
The largest-scale test of whether lives could be saved by giving cars the ability to communicate with each other on the road got under way here last month in a program that could steer the future of auto safety regulation.
Image: General Motors
For the next year, about 3,000 Ann , Michigan Arbor residents will go about their daily driving in cars outfitted with electronic gear that tracks their vehicle’s location and the locations of other similarly-equipped vehicles.
If two vehicles appear to be on a collision course, alarms will chime—or in some cases a machine-generated voice will issue a warning. The systems, for example, can alert a driver when a vehicle three or four cars ahead in a line of cars jams on its brakes, and sound a warning to prevent a rear-end collision.
The project, funded with $25 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation, will generate data that regulators will use as they weigh whether future cars should have such “vehicle-to-vehicle” crash avoidance technology as federally-mandated standard equipment.
Safety regulators and automotive technologists are enthusiastic about the potential of vehicle-to-vehicle safety technology, but officials cautioned that they need to know more about how drivers react to the warnings the systems provide.
But until his agency gets more data on how vehicle to vehicle technology works in day-to-day driving with ordinary citizens regulators won’t start work on new rules requiring such systems.
Efforts to push widespread adoption of vehicle-to-vehicle safety systems could encounter various obstacles, including tight federal and state budgets, consumer resistance to technology that tracks their location, the costs of the hardware and software, and uncertainty about where liability would rest if a system failed to prevent an accident.
The biggest uncertainty with new safety technology is how drivers will respond to warnings—particularly if they come too frequently or are too often false alarms. Recent research by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that lane departure warning systems installed on a growing number of new vehicles have so far had no significant impact in reducing crashes, according to its analysis of crash data.
Eight major auto makers have provided vehicles and engineers to the yearlong Ann Arbor road test called he Connected Vehicle Safety Pilot Program, which will be overseen by researchers from the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute.
Retroactive Claims For Attendant Care
Section 42(5) of the SABS states:
Well it seems that might not be true according to T.N. v. The Personal (FSCO A6-0003999, July 26, 2012) which deals with s. 39(3) of the Old SABS.
The provisions of s. 39 (Old SABS) clearly indicated that an insurer was only obliged to begin payment within 10 business days after receipt of the Form 1. Similarly, the insurer’s right to assess attendant care needs and correspondingly adjust payments appeared to arise only after receipt of the Form 1. Pending receipt of the Form 1, the insurer had no explicit right to assess the claimant's attendant care needs.
Arbitrator Bayefsky found that s. 39(3) did not displace the insurer’s obligation to pay “reasonable and necessary Attendant Care Benefits” determined in accordance with a submitted Form 1. While s. 39(3) provided that an insurer was not required to pay Attendant Care Benefits before the Form 1 was submitted, this did not, in Arbitrator Bayefsky’s view, mean that a claimant forfeited their right to attendant care benefits prior to submitting a Form 1.
These provisions were included in the SABS specifically to prevent retroactive claims for attendant care in an effort to contain fraud in the system. An insurer is at a considerable disadvantage when presented with a claim for 6 months of retroactive attendant care benefits during which it may have limited or no information as to the extent of the attendant care needs or “expenses incurred”.
Insurers can expect for retroactive attendant care benefit claims which will likely be used as leverage for settlements. The best advice for containing exposure is to proactively request submission of For 1s where the claim does not involve a minor injury.
An insurer may, but is not required to, pay an expense incurred before an assessment of attendant care needs that complies with this section is submitted to the insurer.A similar provision (39(3)) can be found in the SABS that applies prior to September 1, 2010. Seems pretty clear. An insurer would not have to pay for attendant care expenses before a Form 1 is submitted by a claimant.
Well it seems that might not be true according to T.N. v. The Personal (FSCO A6-0003999, July 26, 2012) which deals with s. 39(3) of the Old SABS.
The provisions of s. 39 (Old SABS) clearly indicated that an insurer was only obliged to begin payment within 10 business days after receipt of the Form 1. Similarly, the insurer’s right to assess attendant care needs and correspondingly adjust payments appeared to arise only after receipt of the Form 1. Pending receipt of the Form 1, the insurer had no explicit right to assess the claimant's attendant care needs.
Arbitrator Bayefsky found that s. 39(3) did not displace the insurer’s obligation to pay “reasonable and necessary Attendant Care Benefits” determined in accordance with a submitted Form 1. While s. 39(3) provided that an insurer was not required to pay Attendant Care Benefits before the Form 1 was submitted, this did not, in Arbitrator Bayefsky’s view, mean that a claimant forfeited their right to attendant care benefits prior to submitting a Form 1.
These provisions were included in the SABS specifically to prevent retroactive claims for attendant care in an effort to contain fraud in the system. An insurer is at a considerable disadvantage when presented with a claim for 6 months of retroactive attendant care benefits during which it may have limited or no information as to the extent of the attendant care needs or “expenses incurred”.
Insurers can expect for retroactive attendant care benefit claims which will likely be used as leverage for settlements. The best advice for containing exposure is to proactively request submission of For 1s where the claim does not involve a minor injury.
Teens Copy Parents' Bad Driving Habits
A new survey from Liberty Mutual Insurance and Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) finds an alarming percentage of teens report their parents have risky driving behaviours. Even more concerning is that the surveyed teens repeat their parents' poor driving habits.
The survey was based on focus groups held in Boston and Atlanta earlier this year involving 1,700 teens.
Given the high percentage of teens who report their parents engage in unsafe driving behaviour while their teen is in the car, it follows that two-thirds (66 percent) of teen drivers report their parents live by different rules than the ones they expect of their teens. These findings highlight the need for parents to realize how their teens perceive their actions.
source
The survey was based on focus groups held in Boston and Atlanta earlier this year involving 1,700 teens.
Parent bevaviour (observed by teens) | Teen behaviour (self-reported) | |
Talking on phone while driving | 91% | 90% |
Speeding | 88% | 94% |
Texting while driving | 59% | 78% |
Driving without seatbelt | 47% | 33% |
Driving and drinking | 20% | 15% |
Driving under marijuana | 7% | 16% |
Given the high percentage of teens who report their parents engage in unsafe driving behaviour while their teen is in the car, it follows that two-thirds (66 percent) of teen drivers report their parents live by different rules than the ones they expect of their teens. These findings highlight the need for parents to realize how their teens perceive their actions.
source
FSCO Rate Approvals Flat For 2nd Quarter Of 2012
Rate filings approved by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) during the second quarter of 2012 remained flat, averaging +0.06%, based on the entire market. As a result, auto insurance rates declined by 0.12% in the first half of 2012.
In the 7 quarters since the introduction of the latest reforms in September 2010, rate filings approved by FSCO have increased by approximately 6.64%. The first quarter of 2012 was the only quarter in which approved rate filings declined during this period.
To date Ontario policyholders have not fully benefited from reforms that decreased coverages for a broad range of no-fault accident benefits.
In the 7 quarters since the introduction of the latest reforms in September 2010, rate filings approved by FSCO have increased by approximately 6.64%. The first quarter of 2012 was the only quarter in which approved rate filings declined during this period.
To date Ontario policyholders have not fully benefited from reforms that decreased coverages for a broad range of no-fault accident benefits.
Thứ Sáu, 29 tháng 11, 2013
Report Confirms That Collisions In Small Vehicles Cause More Injuries
It should come as no surprise that you are more likely to be injured as a passenger in a small vehicle. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and Highway Loss Data Institute reported has provided accident safety data on a wide range of vehicle models including mini, small and midsize four-door cars. Clearly smaller vehicles had more frequent than average personal injury claims. Below is a comparison of mini 4-door cars and large SUVs. Not only are personal injury claims higher in the smaller vehicles but so are collision claims.
To see the data on all vehicle models reviewed including years prior to 2009 to to the IIHS website at www.iihs.org.
MINI 4-DOORS 2009-11
LARGE SUVs 2009-11
Scale
Substantially better
Better than average
Average
Worse than average
Substantially worse
To see the data on all vehicle models reviewed including years prior to 2009 to to the IIHS website at www.iihs.org.
MINI 4-DOORS 2009-11
| Vehicle | Collision | Property damage | Compre- hensive | Personal injury | Medical payment | Bodily injury |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chevrolet Aveo | 127 | 123 | 105 | 183 | 212 | 175 |
| Ford Fiesta | 98 | 95 | 104 | 134 | 140 | |
| Hyundai Accent | 127 | 131 | 81 | 173 | 214 | 179 |
| Kia Rio | 115 | 121 | 84 | 175 | 203 | 151 |
| Mazda 2 | 91 | 130 | ||||
| Toyota Yaris | 112 | 101 | 89 | 201 | 171 | 125 |
| Toyota Yaris hatchback | 89 | 91 | 73 | 127 | 146 | 94 |
LARGE SUVs 2009-11
| Vehicle | Collision | Property damage | Compre- hensive | Personal injury | Medical payment | Bodily injury |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buick Enclave | 83 | 101 | 91 | 62 | 61 | 90 |
| Buick Enclave 4WD | 90 | 116 | 101 | 56 | 62 | 98 |
| Chevrolet Tahoe | 68 | 108 | 97 | 59 | 70 | 93 |
| Chevrolet Tahoe 4WD | 66 | 112 | 95 | 58 | 61 | 96 |
| Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid | 47 | 112 | ||||
| Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid 4WD | 104 | 170 | 111 | |||
| Chevrolet Traverse | 67 | 100 | 86 | 79 | 74 | 88 |
| Chevrolet Traverse 4WD | 75 | 108 | 97 | 77 | 75 | 81 |
| Dodge Durango | 116 | 103 | ||||
| Dodge Durango 4WD | 66 | 127 | ||||
| Ford Expedition | 78 | 84 | 108 | 57 | 65 | |
| Ford Expedition 4WD | 86 | 102 | 119 | 56 | 60 | |
| GMC Acadia | 63 | 96 | 74 | 66 | 62 | 81 |
| GMC Acadia 4WD | 70 | 108 | 85 | 62 | 51 | 85 |
| GMC Yukon | 67 | 116 | 108 | 64 | 53 | 92 |
| GMC Yukon 4WD | 83 | 126 | 113 | 57 | 44 | 87 |
| GMC Yukon hybrid 4WD | 74 | 83 | ||||
| Nissan Armada | 88 | 109 | 112 | 93 | 91 | 89 |
| Nissan Armada 4WD | 89 | 102 | 119 | 83 | 79 | |
| Toyota Sequoia | 87 | 123 | 89 | |||
| Toyota Sequoia 4WD | 105 | 131 | 226 | 54 | ||
| Volkswagen Touareg 4WD | 99 | 116 |
Scale
Substantially better
Better than average
Average
Worse than average
Substantially worse
Are Non-Driving Rating Factors Unfairly Weighted in Auto Rates?
Rating factors that have little to do with an individual’s driving abilities appear to have considerable bearing on the price consumers pay for auto insurance, a report from Consumer Federation of America (CFA) asserts.
CFA also says the rating factors in question discriminate against low- and middle-income drivers.
The CFA released its third report this year examining the affordability of auto insurance and its impact on moderate income individuals’ mobility and access to better paying jobs.
In this latest report, the consumer-advocacy group examined how non-driving rating factors can affect the cost of auto insurance, increasing the price of coverage by as much as 50 percent or more depending upon location and insurer.
The report examined the price of minimum-liability insurance for a 30-year old woman working as a bank teller, with a clean driving record, high school education, and insurance coverage that lapsed 15 days ago. Quotes were sought from the websites of the five largest U.S. insurers in Baltimore, Miami, Louisville, Houston and Los Angeles. A quote was obtained for the individual under the standard information provided. Then new quotes were obtained adding five different rating factors:
• Married.
• Homeowner.
• Professional.
• No break in coverage.
• Higher-income zip code.
With each factor, the price of insurance declined, and when all five rating factors were added to the quote, the change in price was as high as 73 percent.
In Ontario, only marital status and some lapses in coverage are rating factors. As well, territorial rating is permissible but not at the postal code level.
The report also includes a survey of 1010 adult Americans performed by CFA and ORC International asking what they thought about the use of specific factors to set auto insurance premiums (see chart below).
In response, Willem Rijksen, a spokesman for the American Insurance Association points out that the use of these factors, such as credit-based insurance scoring, location of the vehicle, driver experience, and traffic citations, helps insurers to more accurately price risk. Neil Aldridge, senior vice president for state and policy affair for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies commented that rating factors should not be “regulated by popularity,” adding, that “is not exactly a precise way to measure risk.”
read more here...
CFA report is here...
CFA also says the rating factors in question discriminate against low- and middle-income drivers.
The CFA released its third report this year examining the affordability of auto insurance and its impact on moderate income individuals’ mobility and access to better paying jobs.
In this latest report, the consumer-advocacy group examined how non-driving rating factors can affect the cost of auto insurance, increasing the price of coverage by as much as 50 percent or more depending upon location and insurer.
The report examined the price of minimum-liability insurance for a 30-year old woman working as a bank teller, with a clean driving record, high school education, and insurance coverage that lapsed 15 days ago. Quotes were sought from the websites of the five largest U.S. insurers in Baltimore, Miami, Louisville, Houston and Los Angeles. A quote was obtained for the individual under the standard information provided. Then new quotes were obtained adding five different rating factors:
• Married.
• Homeowner.
• Professional.
• No break in coverage.
• Higher-income zip code.
With each factor, the price of insurance declined, and when all five rating factors were added to the quote, the change in price was as high as 73 percent.
In Ontario, only marital status and some lapses in coverage are rating factors. As well, territorial rating is permissible but not at the postal code level.
The report also includes a survey of 1010 adult Americans performed by CFA and ORC International asking what they thought about the use of specific factors to set auto insurance premiums (see chart below).
In response, Willem Rijksen, a spokesman for the American Insurance Association points out that the use of these factors, such as credit-based insurance scoring, location of the vehicle, driver experience, and traffic citations, helps insurers to more accurately price risk. Neil Aldridge, senior vice president for state and policy affair for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies commented that rating factors should not be “regulated by popularity,” adding, that “is not exactly a precise way to measure risk.”
read more here...
CFA report is here...
Social Media and Auto Insurance
Social media is a tool that people use to share and learn more about each other. In doing so, you get to know people better and build relationships.
Even if you wanted to, it is impossible to ignore the phenomena of social media. Social media platforms are now part of mainstream business life. Insurers now have Facebook pages, Twitter handles and YouTube videos.
Many people think it is about e-commerce. E-commerce has nothing to do with social media; in fact a great way to fail at social media is to spend your time using it to “sell”. Just because you have a sales-enabled web site does not mean you are social.
Social media sites allow users to create, distribute and receive specialized content and to interact with communities of people. But the extent to which insurer have adapted to, and embracing social media varies considerably, despite the opportunities available.
Social media first benefits the consumer and that in turn benefits the company. Here’s how that works: The company has the greatest opportunity now, with the advent of the social networks and the number of people now using the social web, to provide value added services via social channels. In addition to providing value added content and resources for clients, the company as a result also creates content that increases audience reach (via search engines, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Google+). Increased reach can then lead to new business development.
The company is also in a position to learn more from our clients about what theycare about – as they share on a personal level, ask questions in the public eye, or dialogue with us. Companies used to have to conduct research, surveys and focus groups to get this kind of valuable information in the past. Now you have very real and immediate access. Social media is a win- win. Customers have a very distinct voice which drive services in to meet their needs, and companies who listen and engage stand to benefit.
Smartphone Apps
The Help I Crashed My Car Blackberry cell phone app allows you to contact your car insurance company, a body shop and up to 3 family members if you’ve been in an accident. This is very useful if you’ve been injured as well because this free Blackberry app links up with your phone’s GPS system to help you find police, hospitals and rental facilities in the area that you’ve had the accident.
We all know that drinking and driving is a very dangerous habit and should never be practiced. Not only does it threaten the safety of everyone on the road, it could increase your auto insurance rates. This is why theR-U-Buzzed iPhone app was released. By entering your weight and what you drank into the application, you will receive a fairly-accurate estimate of your blood-alcohol content and a recommendation of whether or not you should drive.
Geico Auto Insurance offers an iPhone app called the GeicoGlove Box. It offers a lot of great features to Geico customers, including offering account access and claims assistance. Also, you can take advantage of videos, how-tos and roadside assistance.
Facebook
For insurers, it is important to engage people who refer others to your company. One of the best examples is Facebook Commerce, which allows customers to share their purchases (or purchase intent) through their Facebook page. In other words, advertising it to the broader online community. A credible social media presence not only builds trust with customers, it keeps brands at front of mind.
Twitter
Some companies have embraced Twitter to keep in touch with customers. A growing number of consumers have shown a preference to Twitter as opposed to a call centre at the end of an 800 number. Tweets range from job opportunities to weather advisories. Here are examples of tweets recently sent out by Geico in the U.S.:
Save $10 on tickets to the GEICO 400 at Chicagoland Speedway with coupon code GEICO2012. http://bit.ly/TvyicG
Check out the http://www.youtube.com homepage today to see some of our new commercials, including one that isn't on TV.
An important message about Hurricane Isaac: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29nbrr-tcxk
GEICO is hiring all across the country! For more watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FKa5JnY54g … and see our jobs site at http://www.geico.jobs
YouTube
Some successful campaigns have focused on reducing risk through education and safety tips. A wide range of online tools have been utilized including blogs, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. YouTube very much is adept at communicating to customers. The IBC has created quite a number of YouTube videos including a series on fraudand tips from an insurance perspective on how you can help make it easier to get your life back together after any natural disaster or weather emergency.
Social media should be seen as a tool that complements the business and marketing strategies. It is important to monitor social media activity to learn what consumers and the public comment about you. And how will you use the feedback to develop new brands and strategies?
2012 Canadian Auto Insurance Statisfaction Study
This week the J.D. Power and Associates released its 2012 Canadian Auto Insurance Satisfaction StudySM. The study, now in its fifth year, measures insurance customers' experiences with their primary insurer. Customer satisfaction is measured across five factors: interaction; price; policy offerings; billing and payment; and claims. Insurers are ranked in three regions: Western (British Columbia; Alberta; Saskatchewan; and Manitoba); Ontario/Atlantic; and Quebec.
Customer satisfaction in the Ontario/Atlantic region has increased by 11 points from 2011, primarily due to an increase in satisfaction with insurer policy offerings (+17 points). Policy offering satisfaction is most often influenced by the quality of discounts offered. In fact, 60 per cent of customers in this region received multiple (three or more) discounts on their policy, a six-percentage-point increase from 2011. Nearly 30 per cent (29%) of customers reported an insurer-initiated rate increase in 2012, representing a four-percentage-point decrease from 2011.
Obviously a big factor has been more stable premiums which continually has a significant impact on overall customer satisfaction. However, J.D. Power and Associates pointed out that there was increases in satisfaction in nearly every factor across the board.
Below is customer satisfaction in Atlantic/Ontario region broken down by insurer.
Customer satisfaction in the Ontario/Atlantic region has increased by 11 points from 2011, primarily due to an increase in satisfaction with insurer policy offerings (+17 points). Policy offering satisfaction is most often influenced by the quality of discounts offered. In fact, 60 per cent of customers in this region received multiple (three or more) discounts on their policy, a six-percentage-point increase from 2011. Nearly 30 per cent (29%) of customers reported an insurer-initiated rate increase in 2012, representing a four-percentage-point decrease from 2011.
Obviously a big factor has been more stable premiums which continually has a significant impact on overall customer satisfaction. However, J.D. Power and Associates pointed out that there was increases in satisfaction in nearly every factor across the board.
Below is customer satisfaction in Atlantic/Ontario region broken down by insurer.
Pastore Court of Appeal Decision Reinforces a Broader Interpretation of Catastrophic Impairment
The Court of Appeal for Ontario recently released its decision in Pastore v. Aviva, allowing the appeal and restoring the Director’s Delegate’s order.
In Pastore, the claimant was involved in a car accident back on November 16, 2002. She suffered a fractured left ankle. Her injury didn’t heal properly, requiring several surgeries over the next five years, and right knee replacement when the ankle pain led to a change in her gait. She applied for a catastrophic impairment determination in 2005. Catastrophic impairment was supported by a DAC assessment but rejected by the insurer. The issue in dispute was whether the claimant was catastrophically impaired due to a mental or behavioural disorder, under subsection 2(1.1)(g) of the SABS.
The arbitrator accepted that a Class 4 impairment (based on the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition) in one area of function was sufficient to meet the definition of “catastrophic impairment”. This was the only area of function she reviewed in detail. On this basis, she concluded that Pastore had suffered a catastrophic impairment. On appeal, the Director’s Delegate agreed with the arbitrator that a Class 4 (marked) impairment was required in only one of four areas of functioning to establish a catastrophic impairment.
The Divisional Court disagreed with FSCO and granted the insurer’s application for judicial review. The Court found that the Director’s Delegate had failed to properly appreciate the effect of incorporating the Guides into the SABS - that the Guides must be treated as part of the legislative scheme. Justice Matlow disagreed in part. He found there was nothing in the Guides which required more than a single finding and there was no requirement to evaluate each of the four areas of functional limitations before a "marked" impairment can be found to qualify. He held that the Guides are not “part of the legislation” and are only guidelines.
This is just another in a series of decisions on the impact of psychological impairment on the determination of catastrophic impairment under the SABS. In Kusnierz v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed last year that psychological impairments should be combined with physical impairments to determine whether a person injured in a car accident has sustained a “catastrophic impairment.”
Prior to that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice’s 2004 decision in Desbiens v. Mordini was the leading trial decision regarding catastrophic impairment.
The Superintendent's Report on the Definition of Catastrophic Impairment in the SABS attempts to mitigate some of the decisions by recommending the elimination of psychological impairments from the SABS definition and replacing them with psychiatric impairments. As well the Superintendent's report recommends that physical impairments and psychological impairments not be combined. The court decisions reinforce my opinion that a regulatory prohibition on combining psychological and physical impairments will ultimately fail. The courts will find ways around it. Instead a better solution might be to develop a more rationale model that acknowledges that psychological impairments can push physical impairments over the catastrophic threshold but that is less susceptible to manipulation. The WSIB has been combining psychological and physical impairments for quite a number of years.
The Superintendent's report was submitted in December of last year but has not been acted upon. The Minister of Finance conducted a stakeholder consultation over the summer. As well, stakeholder discussed the report during presentations to two Standing Committees of the Legislature during May and July of this year.
the Pastore Divisional Court decision is here..
the Pastore Court of Appeal decision is here...
In Pastore, the claimant was involved in a car accident back on November 16, 2002. She suffered a fractured left ankle. Her injury didn’t heal properly, requiring several surgeries over the next five years, and right knee replacement when the ankle pain led to a change in her gait. She applied for a catastrophic impairment determination in 2005. Catastrophic impairment was supported by a DAC assessment but rejected by the insurer. The issue in dispute was whether the claimant was catastrophically impaired due to a mental or behavioural disorder, under subsection 2(1.1)(g) of the SABS.
The arbitrator accepted that a Class 4 impairment (based on the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition) in one area of function was sufficient to meet the definition of “catastrophic impairment”. This was the only area of function she reviewed in detail. On this basis, she concluded that Pastore had suffered a catastrophic impairment. On appeal, the Director’s Delegate agreed with the arbitrator that a Class 4 (marked) impairment was required in only one of four areas of functioning to establish a catastrophic impairment.
The Divisional Court disagreed with FSCO and granted the insurer’s application for judicial review. The Court found that the Director’s Delegate had failed to properly appreciate the effect of incorporating the Guides into the SABS - that the Guides must be treated as part of the legislative scheme. Justice Matlow disagreed in part. He found there was nothing in the Guides which required more than a single finding and there was no requirement to evaluate each of the four areas of functional limitations before a "marked" impairment can be found to qualify. He held that the Guides are not “part of the legislation” and are only guidelines.
This is just another in a series of decisions on the impact of psychological impairment on the determination of catastrophic impairment under the SABS. In Kusnierz v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company, the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed last year that psychological impairments should be combined with physical impairments to determine whether a person injured in a car accident has sustained a “catastrophic impairment.”
Prior to that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice’s 2004 decision in Desbiens v. Mordini was the leading trial decision regarding catastrophic impairment.
The Superintendent's Report on the Definition of Catastrophic Impairment in the SABS attempts to mitigate some of the decisions by recommending the elimination of psychological impairments from the SABS definition and replacing them with psychiatric impairments. As well the Superintendent's report recommends that physical impairments and psychological impairments not be combined. The court decisions reinforce my opinion that a regulatory prohibition on combining psychological and physical impairments will ultimately fail. The courts will find ways around it. Instead a better solution might be to develop a more rationale model that acknowledges that psychological impairments can push physical impairments over the catastrophic threshold but that is less susceptible to manipulation. The WSIB has been combining psychological and physical impairments for quite a number of years.
The Superintendent's report was submitted in December of last year but has not been acted upon. The Minister of Finance conducted a stakeholder consultation over the summer. As well, stakeholder discussed the report during presentations to two Standing Committees of the Legislature during May and July of this year.
the Pastore Divisional Court decision is here..
the Pastore Court of Appeal decision is here...
Thứ Năm, 28 tháng 11, 2013
California Proposition 33, Automobile Insurance Persistency Discounts
In California, a ballot proposition is a proposed law that is submitted to the electorate for approval in a direct vote. Propositions have been part of the California political landscape for quite some time.
A ballot proposition may be proposed by the State Legislature or by a petition signed by members of the public under the initiative system.
One of the best known was Proposition 13 in 1978 which decreased property taxes and imposed a 2/3 requirement for budget votes and tax increases. Some Propositions have been passed but found unconstitutional such as Proposition 22 in 2000 which banned same-sex marriages but was struck down by the California Supreme Court.
On November 6th, there will be eleven propositions on the ballot including Proposition 33 which if passed would change current law to permit insurance companies to set prices based on whether the driver previously carried auto insurance with any insurance company. Insurance companies would be allowed to give proportional discounts to drivers with some prior insurance coverage and increase the cost of insurance to drivers who have not maintained continuous coverage. It would also treat drivers with a lapse as continuously covered if the lapse is due to military service or loss of employment, or if the lapse is less than 90 days.
Proposition 33 is similar to Proposition 17, which was on the June 8, 2010 ballot. Proposition 17 was narrowly defeated. Unlike Proposition 17, Proposition 33 exempts soldiers and those who have been unemployed for 18 months or less from paying more after a lapse.
There is a provision in Ontario regulations dealing with lapses in insurance coverage. Ontario Regulation 664 prohibits an insurer from considering a lapse in insurance coverage for purposes of risk classification unless:
California law requires all drivers to buy automobile insurance. Approximately 85% of California drivers follow the law and buy insurance. If you follow the law and maintain continuous automobile insurance coverage, you are currently eligible for a discount, but only if you stay with the same insurance company. Current law punishes you for seeking better insurance or trying to get a better deal by taking away your discount for being continuously insured.
Those opposed are concerned that insurers will use the new rules to raise rates on drivers. There is concerns that people who stop driving, perhaps for economic reasons, and need to begin driving again and will therefore pay higher rates. The Ontario regulation only allows insurers raise rates due to a lapse of coverage where the lapse was the result of a driving conviction, licence suspension of policy cancellation.
UPDATE: Proposition 33 was defeated on Tuesday for the second time in three years. It was the second attempt by billionaire insurance executive George Joseph to let insurers lower rates for drivers who maintain insurance coverage and raise them for drivers who dropped coverage in the past. Consumer advocates raised about $200,000 to defeat the measure but were dramatically outspent by Joseph, who donated $16 million to the yes campaign.
A ballot proposition may be proposed by the State Legislature or by a petition signed by members of the public under the initiative system.
One of the best known was Proposition 13 in 1978 which decreased property taxes and imposed a 2/3 requirement for budget votes and tax increases. Some Propositions have been passed but found unconstitutional such as Proposition 22 in 2000 which banned same-sex marriages but was struck down by the California Supreme Court.
On November 6th, there will be eleven propositions on the ballot including Proposition 33 which if passed would change current law to permit insurance companies to set prices based on whether the driver previously carried auto insurance with any insurance company. Insurance companies would be allowed to give proportional discounts to drivers with some prior insurance coverage and increase the cost of insurance to drivers who have not maintained continuous coverage. It would also treat drivers with a lapse as continuously covered if the lapse is due to military service or loss of employment, or if the lapse is less than 90 days.
Proposition 33 is similar to Proposition 17, which was on the June 8, 2010 ballot. Proposition 17 was narrowly defeated. Unlike Proposition 17, Proposition 33 exempts soldiers and those who have been unemployed for 18 months or less from paying more after a lapse.
There is a provision in Ontario regulations dealing with lapses in insurance coverage. Ontario Regulation 664 prohibits an insurer from considering a lapse in insurance coverage for purposes of risk classification unless:
- the insured person was convicted of driving without insurance during the lapse in coverage;
- the lapse resulted from the termination of an automobile insurance policy because the insured person failed to pay the premiums due under the policy;
- the lapse resulted from the suspension of the insured person's driver's license as a result of a driving conviction;
- the lapse resulted from the insured person's attempt to misrepresent their driving record due to earlier accidents or convictions, in order to avoid paying higher insurance premiums.
California law requires all drivers to buy automobile insurance. Approximately 85% of California drivers follow the law and buy insurance. If you follow the law and maintain continuous automobile insurance coverage, you are currently eligible for a discount, but only if you stay with the same insurance company. Current law punishes you for seeking better insurance or trying to get a better deal by taking away your discount for being continuously insured.
Those opposed are concerned that insurers will use the new rules to raise rates on drivers. There is concerns that people who stop driving, perhaps for economic reasons, and need to begin driving again and will therefore pay higher rates. The Ontario regulation only allows insurers raise rates due to a lapse of coverage where the lapse was the result of a driving conviction, licence suspension of policy cancellation.
UPDATE: Proposition 33 was defeated on Tuesday for the second time in three years. It was the second attempt by billionaire insurance executive George Joseph to let insurers lower rates for drivers who maintain insurance coverage and raise them for drivers who dropped coverage in the past. Consumer advocates raised about $200,000 to defeat the measure but were dramatically outspent by Joseph, who donated $16 million to the yes campaign.
Woman Accused Of Committing Insurance Fraud From Inside Ambulance
This is an interesting story from Philadelphis where woman tried to commit insurance fraud — from an ambulance — after her vehicle was involved in an accident.
On the way to the hospital after she was involved in a four-car accident last October, Regina Whitehead did what most people do: She called her insurance company.
Only she didn’t call to report the accident, but to add comprehensive, collision and rental coverage, according to the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office.
Recently, Whitehead was charged with insurance fraud and criminal attempt/theft by deception. The 22-year-old Ambler woman was arraigned before Bensalem District Judge Joseph Falcone, who set her free on $25,000 unsecured bail.
Both charges are third-degree felonies punishable by up to seven years in prison.
According to the AG’s office, Whitehead’s 1998 Ford Taurus was involved in the accident Oct. 6, 2011, shortly before 4 p.m. on West Chester Pike in Chester County. At the time, Whitehead was insured through Infinity Insurance, which has an office in Bensalem, according to a probable cause affidavit.
About an hour after the accident -- during an ambulance ride to Chester County Hospital for treatment -- Whitehead allegedly called the insurance company to add extra coverage to her car, according to court documents.
A few hours later on the night of the accident, she called Infinity to report she was involved in an accident and to verify that she had comprehensive collision coverage. She was told during the phone call that if she didn't have the coverage in place at the time of the accident, the insurer wouldn't cover the damage, according to the attorney general.
The next day, Whitehead spoke with an Infinity representative in Bensalem and specifically affirmed that her collision coverage was added “before the accident,” according to the affidavit. Later that same day, though, she withdrew her insurance claim.
The attorney general said Whitehead admitted last month that she added the coverage after being injured in the accident and while in the ambulance and then lied about it. “Whitehead said she did this at the advice of a friend so she would be covered by the insurance company,” according to the attorney general.
source
Only she didn’t call to report the accident, but to add comprehensive, collision and rental coverage, according to the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office.
Recently, Whitehead was charged with insurance fraud and criminal attempt/theft by deception. The 22-year-old Ambler woman was arraigned before Bensalem District Judge Joseph Falcone, who set her free on $25,000 unsecured bail.
Both charges are third-degree felonies punishable by up to seven years in prison.
According to the AG’s office, Whitehead’s 1998 Ford Taurus was involved in the accident Oct. 6, 2011, shortly before 4 p.m. on West Chester Pike in Chester County. At the time, Whitehead was insured through Infinity Insurance, which has an office in Bensalem, according to a probable cause affidavit.
About an hour after the accident -- during an ambulance ride to Chester County Hospital for treatment -- Whitehead allegedly called the insurance company to add extra coverage to her car, according to court documents.
A few hours later on the night of the accident, she called Infinity to report she was involved in an accident and to verify that she had comprehensive collision coverage. She was told during the phone call that if she didn't have the coverage in place at the time of the accident, the insurer wouldn't cover the damage, according to the attorney general.
The next day, Whitehead spoke with an Infinity representative in Bensalem and specifically affirmed that her collision coverage was added “before the accident,” according to the affidavit. Later that same day, though, she withdrew her insurance claim.
The attorney general said Whitehead admitted last month that she added the coverage after being injured in the accident and while in the ambulance and then lied about it. “Whitehead said she did this at the advice of a friend so she would be covered by the insurance company,” according to the attorney general.
source
FSCO Approves Form Changes To Facilitate Better MIG Data
FSCO has introduced an additional change effective November 1, 2012 dealing with the submission of the Auto Insurance Standard Invoice (OCF-21). As of the effective date HCAI will be rejecting invoices submitted that do not include two new mandatory data fields dealing with MIG treatment.
The two fields are the date that each MIG treatment Block commenced, and the profession(s) of the health practitioner(s) who provided the treatment, are to be identified.
The two fields are the date that each MIG treatment Block commenced, and the profession(s) of the health practitioner(s) who provided the treatment, are to be identified.
These changes build on previous revisions to the OCF-21 back on July 1, 2012 when it became mandatory to complete the “Plan Number” field. The Health Claims for Auto Insurance July 2012 Guideline (Superintendent’s Guideline No. 02/12) provides direction on how to complete this field.
These changes are intended to provide FSCO and stakeholders with a better understand medical and rehabilitation costs and trends. As well, there have been gaps identified where additional information is required in order to obtain useful data regarding minor injury claims.
Dwight Duncan To Retire
Earlier I had written on the impact of Premier Dalton McGuinty's resignation on the auto insurance system. At the time I had speculated, as had others, that Minister of Finance Dwight Duncan would be running for Liberal leadership.
McGuinty had informed his Cabinet that ministers planning to run for leader would have to resign from Cabinet. I can tell you from experience that this was a wise decision. Back in 2002, when Mike Harris stepped down as premier of Ontario he did not ask his ministers to resign if there were running to replace him. As a result Cabinet dissolved into competing factions and was pretty dysfunctional for a while. I had an opportunity to observe this first hand when appearing before a Cabinet committee I witnessed a war break out over a minor regulation change being brought to the committee by the minister who was a leadership candidate where the committee chair was also leadership candidate.
My earlier post had suggested that with Minister Duncan resigning to run for leader, there would be little happening on the auto insurance file for some time. Now that he appears to be staying in Cabinet there will be some opportunities over the next few months to move some auto insurance issues forward. There will be no legislative changes with the legislature having been prorogued, but they may be opportunities to make some regulatory changes since Cabinet will continue to meet.
This window will be small with a leadership vote over the weekend of January 25th. Shortly after the new premier will likely be appointing a new Cabinet before calling an election. Since Minister Duncan has announced he will not be running for re-election, he will certainly be replaced shortly after the Liberal leadership convention.
So during this small window, if the outgoing minister still wants to make changes to the UDAP regulations or the definition of catastrophic impairment, it is possible. In addition, since he is leaving office he may be may more willing to introduce changes that might be more contentious.
So this change in events creates a different set of opportunities and possibilities, so stay tuned. It could get interesting.
McGuinty had informed his Cabinet that ministers planning to run for leader would have to resign from Cabinet. I can tell you from experience that this was a wise decision. Back in 2002, when Mike Harris stepped down as premier of Ontario he did not ask his ministers to resign if there were running to replace him. As a result Cabinet dissolved into competing factions and was pretty dysfunctional for a while. I had an opportunity to observe this first hand when appearing before a Cabinet committee I witnessed a war break out over a minor regulation change being brought to the committee by the minister who was a leadership candidate where the committee chair was also leadership candidate.
My earlier post had suggested that with Minister Duncan resigning to run for leader, there would be little happening on the auto insurance file for some time. Now that he appears to be staying in Cabinet there will be some opportunities over the next few months to move some auto insurance issues forward. There will be no legislative changes with the legislature having been prorogued, but they may be opportunities to make some regulatory changes since Cabinet will continue to meet.
This window will be small with a leadership vote over the weekend of January 25th. Shortly after the new premier will likely be appointing a new Cabinet before calling an election. Since Minister Duncan has announced he will not be running for re-election, he will certainly be replaced shortly after the Liberal leadership convention.
So during this small window, if the outgoing minister still wants to make changes to the UDAP regulations or the definition of catastrophic impairment, it is possible. In addition, since he is leaving office he may be may more willing to introduce changes that might be more contentious.
So this change in events creates a different set of opportunities and possibilities, so stay tuned. It could get interesting.
Thứ Tư, 27 tháng 11, 2013
Will The Resignation Of The Premier Impact On The Auto Insurance Sector?
As we look around at the fallout after Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty resigned after nine years in office, informing caucus on Monday evening that it is time for renewal.
Earlier in the day Mr. McGuinty asked the Lieutenant-Governor to prorogue the legislature amid continuing fallout from a scandal over the politically motivated cancellation of two power plants and an ongoing battle with organized labour over plans to impose new collective agreements that contain wage freezes via legislation.
Proroguing the legislature makes a lot of sense when the government is essentially leaderless although a caretaker leader could have been appointed. Proroguing the legislature is a gift to the next premier because the contempt charges directed at the government end along with all the bills before the legislature. As well during the Liberal leadership the Opposition will not be able to embarrass the government if the legislature is not sitting. There is a possibility despite that the new Premier will immediately call an election despite the Election Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005 which calls for fixed election dates. The outcome of an election are impossible to predict at this time but it is possible that another party will form the next government.
So how will this all impact on the auto insurance sector? After all there are a number of significant policy initiatives that are in the pipeline.
Definition of Catastrophic Impairment
The Superintendent at FSCO submitted his recommendations for changes to the SABS definition of catastrophic impairment to Minister Dwight Duncan in December 2011. His report was released in the spring of 2012 and was consulted on by the Ministry of Finance over the summer. There has been wide-spread opposition to the Superintendent's report. Some of the recommendations reflect scientific evidence but others do not. Even those recommendations that are based on science have an element of arbitrariness in the selection of the catastrophic threshold.
If Minister Duncan decides to run for leadership he will likely be asked to resign from Cabinet. It is unlikely that his replacement will want to wade into this contentious policy initiatives that provides no political benefits. The prospects for a regulation change are poor.
Fraud
The Auto Insurance Anti-Fraud Task Force is at the conclusion of their mandate and very close to providing the minister with their final report. However, it is unclear who that minister will be and how long he or she will be the minister. So what he or she will do with that report is unclear. It is highly probable that the next minister will be relatively unfamiliar with auto insurance policy and will need to spend time being brief on the portfolio in addition to other finance issues.
It is likely that the more significant changes to be recommended by the Task Force will require amendments to the Insurance Act. However, with the legislature prorogued, there won't be any bills introduced for at least 6 months if not more. Even those changes that only require regulatory changes may also be put on hold. Regulation changes can be made by Cabinet which will continue to meet during the Liberals' leadership campaign. However, it will not likely be business as usual until a new premier is selected. Cabinet will continue to make decisions but new policy initiatives will not likely be acted upon except where there is an urgent need.
There are ant-fraud initiatives that will not require legislation or regulation, for example most of the consumer education and engagement proposals. These recommendations may not be delayed.
It is also not likely that the Task Force will be ignored if there is a new government. All the parties have stated that they support initiatives that address auto insurance fraud. What is unclear is how much of the Task Force's report that will be acted on.
Dispute Resolution Review
The government has made a commitment in the 2012 Budget to review the dispute resolution system operated by FSCO. The review arose from the mediation backlog that has crippled the auto insurance system. No announcement has been made by the Ministry of Finance regarding the vehicle for conducting the review or the time line. There is no reason to delay the review until after a new premier is selected as the review is likely to be overseen by bureaucrats and not politicians. By the time the review is completed the legislature will have returned and if the government decides to act on the recommendations, a bill could be introduced.
Earlier in the day Mr. McGuinty asked the Lieutenant-Governor to prorogue the legislature amid continuing fallout from a scandal over the politically motivated cancellation of two power plants and an ongoing battle with organized labour over plans to impose new collective agreements that contain wage freezes via legislation.
Proroguing the legislature makes a lot of sense when the government is essentially leaderless although a caretaker leader could have been appointed. Proroguing the legislature is a gift to the next premier because the contempt charges directed at the government end along with all the bills before the legislature. As well during the Liberal leadership the Opposition will not be able to embarrass the government if the legislature is not sitting. There is a possibility despite that the new Premier will immediately call an election despite the Election Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005 which calls for fixed election dates. The outcome of an election are impossible to predict at this time but it is possible that another party will form the next government.
So how will this all impact on the auto insurance sector? After all there are a number of significant policy initiatives that are in the pipeline.
Definition of Catastrophic Impairment
The Superintendent at FSCO submitted his recommendations for changes to the SABS definition of catastrophic impairment to Minister Dwight Duncan in December 2011. His report was released in the spring of 2012 and was consulted on by the Ministry of Finance over the summer. There has been wide-spread opposition to the Superintendent's report. Some of the recommendations reflect scientific evidence but others do not. Even those recommendations that are based on science have an element of arbitrariness in the selection of the catastrophic threshold.
If Minister Duncan decides to run for leadership he will likely be asked to resign from Cabinet. It is unlikely that his replacement will want to wade into this contentious policy initiatives that provides no political benefits. The prospects for a regulation change are poor.
Fraud
The Auto Insurance Anti-Fraud Task Force is at the conclusion of their mandate and very close to providing the minister with their final report. However, it is unclear who that minister will be and how long he or she will be the minister. So what he or she will do with that report is unclear. It is highly probable that the next minister will be relatively unfamiliar with auto insurance policy and will need to spend time being brief on the portfolio in addition to other finance issues.
It is likely that the more significant changes to be recommended by the Task Force will require amendments to the Insurance Act. However, with the legislature prorogued, there won't be any bills introduced for at least 6 months if not more. Even those changes that only require regulatory changes may also be put on hold. Regulation changes can be made by Cabinet which will continue to meet during the Liberals' leadership campaign. However, it will not likely be business as usual until a new premier is selected. Cabinet will continue to make decisions but new policy initiatives will not likely be acted upon except where there is an urgent need.
There are ant-fraud initiatives that will not require legislation or regulation, for example most of the consumer education and engagement proposals. These recommendations may not be delayed.
It is also not likely that the Task Force will be ignored if there is a new government. All the parties have stated that they support initiatives that address auto insurance fraud. What is unclear is how much of the Task Force's report that will be acted on.
Dispute Resolution Review
The government has made a commitment in the 2012 Budget to review the dispute resolution system operated by FSCO. The review arose from the mediation backlog that has crippled the auto insurance system. No announcement has been made by the Ministry of Finance regarding the vehicle for conducting the review or the time line. There is no reason to delay the review until after a new premier is selected as the review is likely to be overseen by bureaucrats and not politicians. By the time the review is completed the legislature will have returned and if the government decides to act on the recommendations, a bill could be introduced.
12-Year-Old Sues Parents For Drunk Driving
Photo by RTE
Faith, now 12, is suing her parents for the physical and psychological injury they caused. Faith and her brother, John, sustained severe injuries when their alcoholic mother passed out while driving the children home from school. Ava, Faith’s 6-year-old sister, and friend Michaela Logan, 9, died when the vehicle crashed into an embankment.
The children’s mother, Mary Carberry, was “in the middle of a pub crawl and decided to pick up the four kids from school.” Mary remembers bits of the accident that killed her youngest daughter. “All I remember is the thump. Then the flashing blue lights,” she testified in court in 2007. “I did not know what I hit. I remember Ava, I remember her face, I just don’t know what happened. I don’t remember arriving in the hospital.”
After the accident, Mary was sentenced to six years in prison, but her time was later reduced to four years.
Now, Faith, with the help of her grandfather, is seeking justice for her sister. Faith was injured in the accident, undergoing surgery to her spine and spending ten weeks in a spinal cast at Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital. Faith also suffered “severe psychological trauma and upset and she attended a child psychologist for three months after the incident.”
Mary Carberry had already been banned from driving at the time of the accident. After two previous DUIs, Mary had no license and no insured vehicle. Faith’s father – also being targeted in the girl’s lawsuit – claims that he bought Mary a car, but didn’t expect her to drive it. He’d merely purchased the car after Mary allegedly told him that the children were “wet and cold” walking to and from school.
“It pulled at my heart strings. She was seeking for me to provide transport, purchase a car and somebody who was insured and had a full licence would drive it,” Tommy Varden told the court, adding that he never intended for Mary to drive the purchased BMW.
Varden added that Mary was attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings at the time, and “seemed to be turning a new leaf.”
The father recounts the night of the accidents, saying that he received a phone call from Mary. “She said Ava was dead and she thought Faith was dead too,” he said. Vargan notes that it was only when he arrived at the hospital that he discovered Mary had been driving the car. “I was angry. I am still very angry. No way would I have given the car to her if I thought she was going to use it that way. I trusted her,” he said.
Faith, however, still holds her father responsible. He did, after all, purchase Mary a car. Vargan insists that, although he’d purchased the vehicle, it was only later that he discovered Mary had insured it, forging his signature on a check.
The lawsuit was settled on Wednesday, but the official outcome has yet to be disclosed.
According to Yahoo!News, Faith’s story is not a unique one. In the US, more than two-thirds of children fatally injured in car accidents “were riding with drunk drivers.” Young children, unlike adults, often do not have the awareness or option to opt out of getting into a car with an intoxicated driver, especially if a parent is behind the wheel.
In March, a mom in Iowa was allegedly driving drunk, and her 15-year-old daughter called 911 from the passenger’s seat. In 2009, four young kids died in a crash after their guardian was found to have a “blood alcohol level of .19 percent.
source
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)