Tampilkan postingan dengan label MVA. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label MVA. Tampilkan semua postingan

Inquiry into Medical Evidence petition


Link to: Inquiry into Medical Evidence petition

FAIR has put together a paper version of the petition calling for a Public Inquiry into the medical evidence used in our courts and administrative tribunals. It is the same as the one we have asked you to sign online.

The Ontario Legislature ONLY accepts ORIGINAL petitions, on paper, with ‘hand signed’ signatures. There are strict rules for petitions so NDP MPP Jagmeet Singh’s office has generously agreed to receive the paper petition in his office and present it at Queen’s Park.

If you or a loved one were injured in an auto accident, at work or elsewhere wouldn’t you want an honest, unbiased and qualified medical opinion/report of your injuries? That’s just not happening in Ontario for injured and disabled individuals who make a claim for benefits through their private or public insurers. What if it was your fault that something happens to someone else? You’d want them to have the best chance at recovery wouldn’t you?

Please print, sign and circulate the petition because quality and qualified medical evidence shouldn’t be something we need – it should be something we already have because there is no real justice without it.

Make a copy and mail the ORIGINAL copies to: MPP Jagmeet Singh, Room 172 Main Legislative Building, Queen’s Park 111 Wellesley St. Toronto, ON M7A 1A5
Thanks for being part of the collective voice needed for change!

Other On-line petition: https://www.change.org/p/the-legislative-assembly-of-ontario-support-a-public-inquiry-into-medical-evidence-in-ontario-s-courts-and-tribunals (these signatures are also important to make our point elsewhere and it gives those on-line the power and opportunity to use their voice)

Source: http://www.fairassociation.ca/

Ontario’s Shame and Scandal – how the injured and disabled are punished by government policy



Victim’s group calls for the Auditor General and the Ontario Ombudsman to investigate what is happening to Ontario’s injured and disabled citizens


TORONTO, November 17, 2015 PRESS RELEASE - Ontario auto insurers are poised to make higher profits on the backs of Ontario’s disabled and injured MVA victims in 2016 while continuing to build up the provincial deficit by downloading the expense of victims to the taxpayers. Recently passed legislation means that coverage for the most injured MVA victims will be cut in half.


In October Ontario’s over 9 million drivers learned through the Lazar Prisman Report that they had been overcharged for auto insurance and likely overpaid by $1.5 billion in the last two years alone.


In recent weeks we learned just how challenging recovery is and how poorly the WSIB injured workers are treated in the Prescription Over-Ruled: Report on How Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board Systematically Ignores the Advice of Medical Professionals.


How are these two stories related? Both systems are focused on their bottom line profits and their investments and not on recovery or the best interests of their clients. Both systems are based on medical evidence to support or deny claims; access to treatments and benefits relies on it. So what happens if those medical examinations aren’t reliable?


Ontario’s auto insurance companies have been delaying and denying their customer’s claims by way of poor quality or biased medical opinion reports in much the same way as is happening at the WSIB. Many of the same experts are employed under the two systems and those assessors who are auto insurers’ “preferred vendors” of these “independent” assessments are often beholden to the company that pays them. Similar to the WSIB assessment model where expectations are to be met or there are consequences.


Providing auto insurers’ with “favourable” medico-legal opinions by minimizing/trivializing legitimate injuries is unethical and it should be treated as a form of fraud. It is after all the mirror image of the type of fraud the FSCO, the Insurance Bureau of Canada and the WSIB say they won’t tolerate.


The insurers’ assessment is the only component of our broken Ontario auto insurance regime that has escaped regulatory scrutiny. It is the corrupted insurer medico-legal (IME/IE) assessment system that stands between injured claimants and their access to the Statutory Accident Benefits (SABs).


The current legislation allows auto insurers to deny policy benefits (including treatment, income replacement, attendant care, etc.) to seriously injured auto victims solely on the basis of the opinions of these second opinion insurer assessments commissioned to question the validity of the diagnosis and prognosis of attending physicians and treatment providers.


No matter how many attending physicians attest to the legitimacy of an injury ultimately the insurer assessor’s opinion (even if unqualified or biased) trumps those of the attending physicians’ in terms of the injured claimant’s eligibility for treatment and benefits.


The legislative changes and cuts to coverage will find many untreated and injured MVA victims dumped onto our OHIP and public supports systems. Insurers have been taking advantage of the taxpayer who ends up paying the costs of car crash survivors through Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP). Insurers’ profits and WSIB books get balanced while victims end up impoverished and at the food bank.


Ontario’s injured and disabled individuals deserve better treatment at the hands of our government be they car crash survivors or WSIB claimants. They have the right to expect to have their medical conditions addressed through the recommendations of their treating physicians and providers who shouldn’t be second-guessed by “hired gun” insurer ‘experts’.


We ask that the Ontario Ombudsman look into the systemic abuse of Ontario’s victims and why the Financial Services Commission of Ontario and the Minister of Finance have failed to protect the interests and well-being of injured Ontarians with meaningful regulation and enforcement.


We ask the Auditor General to look into the reasons why the Minister of Finance (MOF) has not taken action on the Auditor General’s 2011 report recommendation that an update on the assessment of health system costs be done. These are the costs to the taxpayer through our medical systems that should be paid by Ontario’s insurers through a transfer of funds. Health care costs and the volume of MVA victims dependent on our social supports have increased substantially since the inception of No-Fault insurance. Yet the transfer of funds from Ontario's insurers to the province has not increased since 2006 before the majority of MVA victims have had their med/rehab claims capped at $3500.00 in 2010, down from $100,000.00 in previous years.


We would ask the Auditor General to go further and assess the cost of the public supports to unpaid MVA victims and WSIB claimants when they are downloaded to OW, ODSP and ultimately CPP Disability. Ontario’s insurers will slash benefits in half to $1 million for med/rehab/attendant care for the most catastrophically injured MVA victims in June of 2016. This will have far reaching costs to taxpayers who not only pay the highest auto insurance premiums in Canada but who are also going to have to pick up the majority of the costs of seriously injured MVA victims and provide additional services through OHIP.


Our auto insurance system is surely broken when insurers are so routinely using our courts as a tool to deny claims. According to StatCan there are over 61,000 auto insurance related cases waiting for hearings in Ontario civil court and over 19,000 more MVA victims at the Financial Services waiting for hearings. All of these delays and denials have a cost and insurers don’t seem to be the ones paying for it.


SOURCE FAIR Association of Victims for Accident Insurance Reform is a not-for-profit organization of MVA victims and their supporters. http://www.fairassociation.ca/

For further information: Media Contact: Rhona DesRoches, 705 543-0574, fairautoinsurance@gmail.com

Accident Benefit Coalition Victim Survey



Accident Benefit Coalition Victim Survey is for Accident Victims who were injured in Ontario Motor Vehicle Collisions (MVCs). The purpose is to collect information regarding victims’ experience in regards to obtaining Ontario Accident Benefits from insurers. Absolutely no personal information is collected or shared.

The Accident Benefit Coalition (ABC) consists of a membership of Ontarians concerned with issues surrounding the provinces’ mandatory Accident Benefits. It was founded by NeuroConnect and FAIR Association and is committed to advocating for Accident Victims in Ontario.


Please share this survey with others you know who have gone through the claims experience!

Social Security Tribunal OUT OF SERVICE Backlog

The rush to relieve the backlog of thousands is on at the Social Security Tribunal of Canada.

Minister Jason Kenny said the backlog of thousands would be gone by this summer.
The New Minister Pierre Poilievre Responsible for taking care of the backlog (that this blogger has contacted, but had no response from) has not gotten rid of the backlog of Appeals.




Someone called. We could not make it out. Someone called again, it was the Social Security Tribunal of Canada, her message said “if your matter has already been completed then you can disregard this call” “otherwise you can call us” and left an OUT OF SERVICE NUMBER 1-877-277-8577.

I emailed the Social Security Tribunal and was informed that I had been given the wrong number by them and it should have been 1-877-227-8577.

To make matters worse the email he replied back to me with quoted someone else s case number! Not mine!

Am I in the twilight zone?

I was a MVA victim in 2007 after a fatal 3 car crash. My application for CPP Disability Benefits was launched in 2008. I still have not received a complete copy of my file, and a lot of what they have sent me so far, is unreadable to any human. At least they didn't leave my medical-legal file on a bench in front of our house unattended this time.

The latest opinion from xxxx the Medical Adjudicator at Service Canada in August was that I have not established a Disability that is “Severe and Prolonged”.The (hired gun) Adjudicator out of the Chatham office goes on to say that I did not provide any medical documentation to support my Disability. 
They have however acknowledged receipt of my 105 page fax to them with the case file number GD37-1. The fax included the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Mediation Brief that included medical documentation to support a finding of a “severe disability”. 
My submitted Doctors findings should not be taken lightly as they come from respectable sources. 
One submission in the Brief is from a Doctor with a 25 year career in the hospital sector focusing on neurological disorders, schizophrenia, and pediatric brain injury and pediatric oncology including consultation to the hospital MS Clinic an acute psychotic disorders clinic. He has a long career in psychological research and scientific publication and presentation. He has published in the areas of chronic insomnia, neurohorrnoes in schizuphrenia, metabolic brain imaging in schizophrenia (positron emission tomography), and neuropsychology of schizophrenia. He carries out psychological asssessment and treatment, supervises clinicians, and carries out psycho legal and multidisiplinary-legal assessments and testifies at Arbitrations and Court. He was the Director of the Hamilton Medical-Legal Society and past President. He has been co-chairman of the Ontario Psychological Association Task Force on Auto Insurance. He was appointed by the Minister of Finance to the Accident Benefits Advisory Committee for Bill 164. He was appointed by the Minister of Finance to be a member of the Ministers Committee on the Designated Assessment Center System for Bill 59 and held the position for a year. He was appointed to the Expert Panel reviewing the Catastrophic Impairment SABS. He was a founding member of the Canadian Academy of Psychologists in Disability Assessment (CAPDA). He received the Karl Heiser Presidential Award from the American Psychological Association and the Ontario Psychological Association Award for his advocacy efforts on behalf of professional psychology. He received the OPA Lifetime Achievment Award. 
Other medical-legal documentation provided to the Social Security Tribunal was from a doctor whos is a registered psychologist with areas of competence in rehabilitation and clinical psychology. He is a partner at a psychology clinic and assessment centre. His doctoral degree is in Clinical Psychology, with a minor in Health Psychology. He has a post graduate diploma program (DESS) through the University of Montreal Faculty of Medicine in Insurance Medicine and Medicolegal Expertise. He has a Master of Science in Community Counselling with specialized training in vocational assessment and counselling. His doctoral training included assessment, diagnosis and treatment of severe mental and behaviour disorders in private and public psychiatric inpatient hospital settings, as well as sheltered workshops. He has also performed disability assessments for patients with severe mental disorders applying for Social Security Disability. As a clinical psychologist, he worked in several chronic care facilities, assessing, diagnosing and treating patients with severe psychological disorders, including psychotic and severe mood disorders. Upon immigrating to Canada he has re specialized in rehabilitation psychology. He since has performed hundreds of psychological disability assessments in relation to M.V.A, WSIB, and other personal injury contexts. He was on the FSCO roster for Post 104 and Catastrophic disability assessors, and has performed hundreds of Catastrophic, Post-I 04 disability and psycho-vocational assessments. He has published scholarly works with respect to catastrophic impairment, and created educational modules addressing catastrophic impairment evaluation for psychological disability assessors. disability and psycho-vocational assessments. He delivered the 2010 Keynote Address to the British Psychological Societys Division of Counselling Psychology on the intersection of psychological assessment and the law. He has also edited two books on the application of humanistic theory to psychological treatment and has also published book chapters and articles in this area. He was the President of the Canadian Academy of Psychologists in Disability Assessment (CAPDA). He has been accepted as an expert witness in Ontario courts. GD37-52

Their medical documentation in the Brief supports a finding of a “chronic pain” , “severe disability” , “severe depression” , “PTSD” , “suffers permanent and serious impairment” , I am “neither exaggerating nor feigning” , “tends to minimize his complaints” , “suffers a complete inability to engage in any employment for which he is reasonably suited by education, training or experience”, “is at a competitive disadvantage in the workforce”. GD37-33 / GD37-34 / GD37-35 / GD37-37 /GD37-38

Also included was a Chronic Pain Assessment from yet another doctor that states: “his neck disability” , “suffered a significant functional, financial and emotional loss” , “suffers from Degenerative Disc Disease in his Cervical Spine, as well as debilitating Myofascial pain syndromes in his cervical spine.” , “severe disability”, and “complete disability” , “WADS III of the neck”. GD37 – 105 / GD37-23 / GD37-25 / GD37-105.

Also included in the Brief was yet another doctor report that states: “completely disabled from any occupation to which he is suited by way of his education, training or experience.” GD37-43

Another Doctors report included in the Brief states: Overall, I am “not employable”. GD37-32.

Rather that go long winded in this post I submit that I have provided enough medical documentation to establish my disability just from the above doctors. You have the other reports and blog postings I will not duplicate them here.

Today I finally received a date for my Appeal Hearing. The date on the notice was 39 days ago. The notice says that my hearing is not going to be until 2016, next year!

In this effort to get rid of the backlog of thousands how many are getting run over. What happened to the pledge to wipe out the backlog by this past summer? How many Appellants are still backlogged at the Social Security Tribunal of Canada?
If my Medical-legal experts are good enough for the Ontario Superior Court, a mediator, numerous doctors and lawyers, and 4 insurance companies they should be good enough for Service Canada and the Social Security Tribunal. I hope that the Tribunal Member that decides my appeal takes into account my medical-legal evidence submitted here in from real Medical experts, that write the rules, and not Service Canada employees with an agenda.

Sincerely,
name removed
CPP Disability Applicant since 2008,
MVA-Insurance-Victim since 2007.



Thank you to all those who help me with my writing and blogging and to those who follow my blog. Unfortunately I have been diagnosed with astigmatism and cataracts in my eyes recently. Advocating for MVA victims will have to be less frequent. Seeing (reading and writing) has now been added to my list of Medical problems.

NO NAMES ARE POSTED ON THIS PAGE AT THIS TIME
THIS POSTING WAS SENT TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRIBUNAL OF CANADA NAME INCLUDED 
Cc: undisclosed
Car insurers and lawyers brawl in public

Car insurers and lawyers brawl in public

Two sides point to each other as reason for high insurance premiums. The truth is, they’re both responsible

By , Toronto Sun
First posted: | Updated: First posted: | Updated:

auto insurance cuts
Hundreds protest the Ontario government’s proposed auto insurance cuts outside Queen's Park in Toronto on June 3, 2015. (Dave Abel/Toronto Sun)
A slugging match recently erupted between car insurance companies and Ontario personal injury lawyers.

The Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC) opened by claiming the public needs regulatory oversight of contingency fees charged by personal injury lawyers.

The IBC feels a change is necessary to protect consumers and allow the government to evaluate the impact of lawyers’ fees on the auto insurance system.

The Ontario Trial Lawyers Association (OTLA) countered by releasing a study it commissioned concerning auto insurance premiums.

According to the study, prepared by two professors at York University’s Schulich School of Business, “consumers in Ontario may have overpaid for auto insurance by between $3 and $4 billion over the period 2001 to 2013.”
The OTLA urged an independent “thorough and truly transparent” review of auto insurance by Ontario’s Auditor General.

Reacting quickly, the IBC fired back through a press release, pointing the finger back at personal injury lawyers claiming, “lawyers’ fees are simply too high and have a significant impact on the cost of auto insurance.”

The IBC supported its conclusion by claiming some lawyers charge 40%, while others between 25% and 33% of any settlement or judgment.

I doubt many lawyers would dare charge a 40% contingency fee, although even a 25% to 33% fee may be too high in some cases.

But, the IBC forgot to mention clients don’t pay the entire contingency fee as a good part of the fee is paid by the insurance company.

To rub it in further, the IBC stated, “In 2013, lawyers received an estimated $500 million from injury claimants out of their insurance settlements for bodily injury claims. These are real dollars that never make it to the claimant. IBC will continue to fight for increased transparency so that consumers can actually see where their insurance dollars go.”

But I don’t think insurers want to open the transparency can of worms.
If they want to talk about “real dollars” that don’t make it to claimants, check out the vast sums paid by insurers for their so-called independent medical examinations (IMEs), used to belittle or deny claims.

According to the most recent Ontario Health Claims Database, insurance companies paid approximately $372 million for IMEs for accidents taking place in the last four years.

In some years, insurance companies forced almost half of all claimants to attend IMEs and in each year the average amount paid per assessed claimant for these exams exceeded the average amount paid per claimant for all medical and rehabilitation expenses.

Sending claimants for multiple and expensive assessments to pro-insurer experts is a major contributor to insurers’ costs and takes “real dollars” out of the pockets of claimants.

That’s not to say lawyers are free of blame.

There’s a long history of lawyers neglecting to act diligently to expose insurer experts who file partisan reports, sometimes outside their sphere of expertise, used by insurers to delay and deny claims.

As well, quality control at some law firms is substandard.

The FAIR Association of Victims for Accident Insurance Reform has recently posted an announcement stating, “ALERT – we are hearing about more and more cases where time limitations for filing have lapsed due to plaintiff’s legal representatives failing to meet limitation period deadlines.”
Then again, motor vehicle litigation and accident benefits claims are highly complex and insurance company tactics often lead to increased fees.

And if the insurance industry wants to point fingers at personal injury lawyers, perhaps they ought to make complete disclosure of the money they spend on defence lawyers and adjusters to deny, delay and defend claims.

Furthermore, how much do insurers pay to fund their massive public relations campaigns -- including political contributions to those in power -- which they effectively use to portray accident victims as opportunistic, malingering or just plain fraudulent?

It seems there is a lot of mud that can be thrown at each side in this messy debate.

But while the debate drags on, insurers continue to exact high premiums and lawyers receive handsome payments for their work.
And accident victims? They’re stuck in the middle.

Source: http://www.torontosun.com/2015/06/13/car-insurers-and-lawyers-brawl-in-public