I was browsing this interesting (albeit somewhat biased) site, learning all sorts of interesting bits about car insurance and its different legal provisions throughout the Canadian provinces; as I'm not a lawyer (or an insurance specialist), I'm not familiar with statistics or any other data related to lawsuits that might have awarded very big money to plaintiffs that had been victimised in a car crash; still, there are numerous references to such occurences on virtually every site that deals with automobile insurance. Could it possibly be just FUD, disseminated by the insurance business? I, personally, have never met (or heard of) someone who had been awarded tenths/hundreds of thousands or even (gasp!) millions of dollars after an accident - but, having spent most of my Canadian years in Quebec - one of the provinces that do NOT allow a victim to sue for pain and suffering and/or other (medical, economic) expenses - the explanation could be really obvious. Still, I'm wondering: has any of you ever met/known such a person?

I've also heard some horror stories about fender-benders, followed by "oh-let's-not-involve-the-insurers-in-this-OK?", followed by legal actions ("whiplash! my neck and my back! oh, the pain!" weeks after, when the incident had nearly faded from the defendant's memory. I tend to take those stories with a grain of salt though, because nearly all involve a specific ethnic group, deemed to be very keen on staging up such events - and thus, the stories could be nothing more than your good ol' racism.

I move that this post is the most boring and incoherent contribution to the board in 2007.

Do I have a seconder?

No, but perhaps the poster values your opinion just as much as you value his post?

its nice to be nice.....

Mark

I was sued for millions after a collision. The case dragged on for years but I didn't pay close attention to the ethnicity of the person suing me.

In Ontario? Before the government imposed the current limits? for "pain and suffering"? And - you didn't lose, I hope?

Of course not. I said that the elusive awardee of fabulous compensations seemed even more mythical because of the fact that (s)he seemed to appear only in stories told by persons of dubious credibility (any reference to racial conspiracies is enough to irrevocably discredit someone).

Yes. Yes. I don't think anyone ever wins or loses, even the insurance companies can't afford litigation so they settle almost everything without prejudice. I don't know if they settled the case, the claim was dropped or if they went to court without me. I suppose it could even still be dragging on.

Wait a second: so they weren't suing you, they were suing your insurer?

What made me frown initially was the fact that IBC (which is quite biased, being the club of the insurance companies) were implying that high premiums are the direct result of "courts awarding quite easily huge amounts of money". Had we been south of the border, I might've believed that statement. But, in Canada?

Meme chose. The action is launched against the individual who, as a condition of the policy, assigns all rights and responsibilities to the insurer. The reason you're not supposed to admit fault at the time of an accident is that, by insuring, you've displaced financial responsibility to the insurer; it's up to them to decide whether or not to assume blame.

I understand that - but you're talking about direct damages (there may be a more precise legal term, but I don't know it, sorry), not about the much less quantifiable "pain and suffering". Somehow I don't see the judges quickly and mindlessly grant millions to each and every plaintiff (as the insurance companies seem to imply it's happening).

And another question: you said you had been sued for millions; so, what happens if you're insured for 1 million, but you're being sued for 2? who's responsible for the defense, in this case (i.e. paying the defense lawyer)? yourself? the insurance company?

Our car insurance covers us for anywhere in North America, so south of the border is included whether you want it too or not.

What I meant was the Americans are infamous for their frivolous lawsuits - and I would've been more prone to believe risky statements about judges granting ridiculous amounts of money, if I had been a resident of the United States.

The claim is boilerplated, "pain and suffering", "loss of libido", everything anyone ever successfully sued for is automatically included in all actions.


I don't say they do but there are certainly some suits settled for large sums.

The insurance company deals with it all. Their complaint is that they write policies based on a best guess of the likely damages resulting from law suits and their guesses have been made invalid by changes in law and judicial fashion. For example, iirc courts used to take the policy liability limit and divide the amount between the claimants in a single incident, now they pay them each that amount so covering someone who ploughs his truck into a crowd is now much more expensive that it used to be.

Most of those suits are inaccurately reported though, a fuss over nothing. For example, the coffee McDonald's served was insanely hot, it wasn't unreasonable for the woman who was served undrinkably hot coffee to sue.

i thought your point was about not expecting a canadian driver to be sued, canadian drivers often travel to the States, and so into a more litigious??(sp) world.

You're right. Too much Bordeaux last night. Apologies.