Starting today, Sony Pictures Repertory is rereleasing in theatres Ghostbusters, the 1984 Hollywood blockbuster that centered on unemployed parapsychology professors who set up shop as ghost removal experts.

The movie was a smash hit, grossing more than $238 million in its box office run (making it the 32^nd biggest grossing film in U.S. box office history after adjustments for inflation.) The characters (Bill Murray’s Peter Venkman, Dan Akroyd’s Ray Stantz and Harold Ramis’ Egon Spengler), along with their costarring ghosts, Stay Puft Marshmallow Man and Slimer spawned a pop culture phenomenon and a legacy of sequels, television shows, toys and other merchandise. One of the most iconic items in the film is the Ghostbusters’ car: the Ectomobile, or Ecto-1. Bought by Ray Stantz for $4,800, the Cadillac Miller-Meteor – also a hearse – required several modifications to make it ghost-capturing worthy.  The movie goes into great detail as to how many repairs are needed, what additions are made and even mentions the vehicle in the soundtrack. One thing that’s not addressed is what sort of insurance coverage the Ecto-1 has.

Luckily for those of us who are both movie buffs and insurance hounds, our friends at Allstate Insurance recently blogged about famous vehicles and what their insurance coverage would likely be. From Ecto-1 to the Batmobile, to James Bond’s Aston Martin DB5 to the Clampett Family Truck, risk assessment officials sought to find out how these screen vehicles would fare in real-life underwriting. Take a look: (Of course, this is purely for entertainment purposes.)

What if the Ghostbusters had to insure their Ecto-1 in the real world? Or if Batman needed his broker to adjust his coverage? Allstate takes a look. (Click to enlarge.)

What do you think? Did Allstate’s team make fair assessments? What sorts of coverage do you think other famous vehicles from the big and small screen would get?

-Julie.

PS – Does value affect coverage? The Universal Studios Ecto-1 Replica was sold at the Barrett-Jackson auto auction in Scottsdale Arizona on January 22, 2010 for $80,000.

Print

Almost one-fifth of Canadians (6.6 million) own a RIM BlackBerry, Apple iPhone or other mobile handset with PC-like functionality. Smartphone ownership represents 33 percent of the total mobile subscriber base in the country. It’s a similar story in the United States, where about 31 percent of mobile owners have a smartphone, said market researcher comScore.

And cellphones, especially smartphones, become more than just purchases based on functionality, more than merely function over form. People think their choice of smartphone defines them, or at least reflects their style and attitude. And people love them. Really, really love them in some situations.

A recent survey from TeleNav, Inc. found that Americans are willing to give up some of life’s greatest pleasures in order to hang on to their phones, especially if that phone is an Apple iPhone.

“While 22 percent of all respondents said they would rather give up their toothbrush than their phone for a week, this number jumped to a whopping 40 percent among iPhone users. Halitosis and other priority quirks aside, 83 percent of iPhone users thought other iPhone users would make the best romantic partners,” TeleNav said.

Respondents in TeleNav’s poll were more willing to give up some essentials than their phone:

• One-third of all respondents would be more willing to give up sex for a week than their mobile phone.
• Of the respondents who indicated they would be more willing to give up sex than their mobile phone for a week, 70% were women.
• 54% of all respondents would be more willing to give up exercise for a week than their mobile phone.
• So what about our guilty pleasures? 55% of respondents would be more willing to give up caffeine for a week than their mobile phone, 63% would be more willing to give up chocolate, and 70% would be willing to forego alcohol.
• One in five respondents are more willing to go shoeless than phoneless for a week.
• iPhone users (43%) were more likely to say they’d go a week without shoes than Android users (27%) or BlackBerry users (25%).

This infographic from TeleNav breaks down the survey results even further:

What would mobile users give up or do to keep their devices? (Infographic from TeleNav, Inc.) Click to enlarge.

How attached are you to your phone? What would you give up? And, for fun, what sort of phone do you have?

Print

Primerica has one of the largest life insurance sales forces in the United States. In 2010 alone, nearly 230,000 people signed up to become insurance agents. But according to reports, only about 20 percent of the company’s recruits actually passed the licensing exam.

In a Wall Street Journal article published earlier this spring, it was reported that Primerica is hoping to make licensing tests easier and is appealing to state regulators to soften the exams. The article reports that not only does Primerica believe the state tests are too difficult, they may also be racially-biased, putting African-Americans and other minorities at a disadvantage.

Brian Gaudoise, a deputy insurance commissioner in Virginia, told the paper that Primerica’s recruits passed the licensing exam at a 38 percent rate in two years through June 2010. Test-takers from other training programs ranged from 51 percent to 83 percent.

Data from the American Council of Life Insurers showed that in Illinois, the pass rate for licensing is 82 percent. (For Caucasians, it was 87 percent; African-Americans 74 percent and Hispanics 70 percent.) In New York, the pass rate was 56 percent (74 percent for Caucasians; 48 percent for African-Americans and 41 percent for Hispanics.)

In Canada, stats from the Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators found that in 2009, 2,895 Primerica Life Insurance-trained students wrote the Full Life Licensing Qualification Program (LLQP) exam, with a pass rate of 48.84 percent. (For comparison, in the same year, those who took ILScorp’s Full LLQP course had a pass rate of 80.85 percent.)

There’s no doubt in my mind that some insurance licensing exams are tough. The insurance industry is a complex one, with layer upon layer of specialties and minutiae. Customers don’t always know what they’re buying or what they have  – a recent TD Insurance poll found that one-quarter of Canadians don’t know what their policies cover and only 51 percent just skim the fine print on their policies. And that’s just the P&C side of the industry. Many customers place their trust in their agent or broker to help them navigate through riders and endorsements, deductibles and terms. For life insurance, there are legal complexities, instances where knowledge of tax law and estate law are needed. As an insurance professional, you’re a key resource to your clients. While passing one initial licensing test won’t automatically make anyone an expert in the field, isn’t a comprehensive – if tough – exam a good starting point?

What do you think?

-Julie.

Print

I am just one person. That is an indisputable fact. But lately I’m starting to feel like a statistic and I don’t like it.

In early April, Best Buy Canada sent me an email to tell me that hackers may have gained access to some of my personal information after there was a data breach at Epsilon, its marketing and communications firm. I knew Best Buy (and ergo Epsilon) only have my name, email address and possibly phone number, so I was not too concerned. That information is available in many different ways. If I had to deal with a few more telemarketing calls or spam emails, it wouldn’t be the end of the world (though annoying) and I shouldn’t have to worry about all of a sudden discovering that I hold three mortgages or have accumulated hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. A quick email password change and I continued on my way.

A few weeks later, I was struck again. I became one of about 77 million people across the world involved in a massive data breach at Sony. The company’s PlayStation Network was hacked and the names, addresses, purchase and download history, birthdates, login information and maybe even credit card information of me and my nearly 77 million counterparts was stolen.

It was inconvenient and frustrating for me to deal with. While I’m not sure what – if any – information of mine the hackers got ahold of, I changed all of my (what seems like thousands) of online passwords and monitored by online financial accounts a little more carefully than usual.

My accounts looked okay, Sony offered up a bit of a “We’re Sorry” promotion and that was that.

And then there was last week…

A letter from Honda dated May 13 advises that personal information has been compromised. (Click to enlarge)

A letter from Honda arrived in my mailbox. (See it attached here.) They too suffered a data breach, this time affecting me and just about 238,000 of my Honda and Acura driving brethren. Honda said that customer names, addresses and Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) were taken, but not credit card information, social insurance numbers or email addresses. To me, that’s not overly reassuring. Neither was this line: “Honda does not share its customer information with unauthorized third parties and does not contact customers asking for financial information.” I believe “unauthorized” is the key word here. While the company may not actively disseminate my personal information, someone – somewhere – is getting access to it.

I know I’m not alone, as I’ve clearly learned in the last couple of months, and the studies back this up. The 2011 Verizon Data Breach Investigation Report found that in 2010, the number of data breaches skyrocketed to 760 from 141 the year before. Bad news, right? Well, in 2009, the average number of records stolen per breach was about 1.02 million. In 2010, it was 5,263.  In 2010, the number of records compromised plummeted from the 2009 rate of 144 million to four million. So … it’s good news?

Not quite. Verizon found that the seeming contradiction between the low data loss and the high number of breaches likely stems from a significant decline in large-scale breaches, caused by a change in tactics by cybercriminals.

“They are engaging in small, opportunistic attacks rather than large-scale, difficult attacks and are using relatively unsophisticated methods to successfully penetrate organizations. For example, only 3 percent of breaches were considered unavoidable without extremely difficult or expensive corrective action,” the company said.

Things aren’t likely to change soon, but I don’t know what I can do. I am a smart online shopper and a diligent personal info shredder. I guard passwords and PINs closely and have a locked mailbox. Aside from eschewing an online presence, refusing to have a bank account or never buying anything again, what are my options? In the last two months, it was Best Buy, Sony and Honda … what will it be in the next two months?

Have you received similar communications lately? How secure do you feel about your personal information collected by companies? Please feel free to commiserate with me.

Julie.

Print

Over the last few weeks, I’ve read horror stories of tornadoes sweeping through American neighbourhoods. I’ve heard Quebeckers and Manitobans tell tales of floodwaters so high, it will take months for things to dry. I’ve seen gut-wrenching footage of Alberta wildfires, only imagining what it’s like to not know if your house was spared or if your neighbours are okay.

There’s undoubtedly a strong connection between natural disasters and the insurance industry. There’s the mobilization of insurance professionals to disaster areas, as we’re seeing now in the Slave Lake region of Alberta. But what about in the online world?

Today’s guest post is from Brandon Clarke, Vice President of the John Bailey Company in Knoxville, Tennessee. After strong storms ripped through his area, he turned immediately to social media to help his clients.

Thanks for letting us use your post, Brandon.

For other insurance professionals reading this: has social media changed the way you deal with claims or other customer issues? Let us know what you’re doing in the Comments section below.

-Julie.

Social Media Changed How Our Agency Handles Claims

As storm one ripped through Knoxville, TN my family and I braced for what sounded like a freight train coming through our house.  We were fortunate enough to be one of those with power and thanks to Todd Howell at wbir and the good ol’ Doppler readings we were able to target and plan to take cover if needed.  The real time Doppler forecast predicted the golf ball hail immediately and the skies opened up to produce a blanket of hail at least an inch deep on our deck.  My 3 year old daughter startled, scared, and curious said to my wife and me “Is that the tomato?”  Laughing, I reached down to hug her and say no its ice falling from the sky and everything is fine.  With power still intact, the storm passed….and I became aware of what tomorrow would hold.  Through the entire night from 5:30 till 2 am I had facebook and twitter open; when I returned to my laptop; I decided it was time to assess the damage.  As I read the tweets and constant flourish of updates, I realized the social media component would serve as my tool to help John Bailey Company clients and others to get started with their claims and help answer questions.  So I started at 8:38 pm during the storms.

Within a few minutes I had folks messaging, texting, calling, tweeting, and emailing me.  Watching the Doppler I felt comfortable starting the claims process for them.  In what seemed to be the second wave of hail, we again took cover as round 2 of hail and heavy tornadoes began.  This time it was stronger and to be honest I was concerned a tornado would approach. We took cover in the closet with my wife, my daughter, a laptop, and 2 cell phones with Twitter/Facebook Apps, and the TV as loud as possible.  My wife was worried that we would lose power and not know what was going on…then I remembered through AT&T Uverse we had a battery pack that would keep our laptop power and internet signal if power was lost.  Within minutes, the TV turned off, the lights went out and we lost power.  From there we reviewed WBIR and WVLT online, as well as facebook, and twitter on our phones.  Getting updates by the second, the noise became worse as the hail pounded and shook the roof.  As the storm passed, we became worried as our cell phones would not pick up a signal and would not dial out….but don’t forget we had facebook and twitter.  Using those social media tools, we were able to check on loved ones by checking their updates.  Again I started to collect claim info and work into the night using AMS360, aVertafore insurance agency management system.  Ten minutes later power was restored and the storm seemed to calm.  From there moving forward the 3^rd hail/tornado storm lost its steam..at least in my neighborhood and I continued to work into the night monitoring, noting, and preparing for the home, auto, and commercial insurance claims process the next day.

Because of the social media component our agency was able to service our clients, getting a few of them in early the next morning to have windshield repairs to cars that would otherwise have owners who would be without transportation.  It also allowed for us to find out which homes needed immediate cleanup and restoration; as well as organize the claims process early and be ready to run a smooth ship in the morning.  One of my facebook post asked if power and Comcast internet was running smooth at our office location.  It was confirmed within 1 minute that it was working, and that was a big help because if it had not, then we may need a few laptops and internet access..maybe a satellite office.  That night we had 11 car claims, and I think around 8 to 9 home claims.  The next morning, we started answering the phones at 7:30 and had 150 claims turned in by noon.  I lost track after that but currently we have around 500 claims.

The social community in Knoxville, TN excites me, because they are just so helpful.  I received a text from a friend, who had a colleague with several inches of flood damage. I decided to post on facebook asking if a friend could borrow a generator to pump water out of a basement.  Two local businesses Misty River Campground and Event Rentals by Rothchild offered to help, but we were a few minutes late; as they had found a solution.  You could say that this time social media failed, but the reality was the size of the generators and manpower/truck needed to move the machines hindered our success. If only I had a truck…

In the days that followed, I had a few people contact me via direct message on twitter, one of these people was a friend of mine that needed some advice on how to handle an adjustor visit.  Twitter also allowed me to retweet information about our insurance companies, possible roofers and dent repair folks located in the Knoxville area, and other insurance pointers.

I was so impressed with the use of Twitter by @TRV_Insurance @TheHartford these guys helped my agency with a few issues and efficiencies in the claims process….as I had questions about the most efficient way to submit different types of catastrophic claims. I also received a phone call from one Hartford’s Southeastern Head Catastrophic managers.  She said they were monitoring twitter and asked if we needed anything.  With all of this information at our fingertips, and real time contact to our clients…there was no way I was shutting down facebook and twitter; I left it on all day.  The constant source of up to date information and communication was extremely beneficial to our agency.

The independent insurance agency model really came together with all of the new social media components.  Furthermore, we had companies coming in our office and checking in to see how they could help.  Safeco offered to bring us lunch and even bring some people to answer phones.  State Auto Insurance Company and Central Insurance Companies were in our office that morning and Auto Owners called to ask us how our families were and what they could do to help.

Our agency focuses on clients who want to succeed, we want to help our client achieve their goals;  social media is our new tool, and I think we truly understand it now.  As claims continue to come in, it is apparent to our agency that personal communication with your insurance agent is the number one reason to select an independent insurance agency.  These days personal communication seems to represent different things.  It’s not about just phone calls anymore; it’s about accessibility, being helpful, and being yourself…

Slay it!

Email me:  brandon@johnbaileyco.com

Print

In February I wrote about pop culture’s somewhat negative view of the insurance industry and the professionals who work in it. (Did you miss it? Check out: Hollywood versus the insurance salesman.) Insurance jobs are seen as laughable, insurance professionals are boring, insurance is a career that traps you, you don’t go after it. The stereotypes are endless!

The idea of insurance as a “fall back” or “Plan B” career once again invaded my headspace this week when I saw an interview with NFL quarterback Tom Brady.

Some background: Brady is a three-time Super Bowl champion, winning the Super Bowl MVP award twice. He has been selected to six Pro Bowl teams (and was invited to seven.) He holds the NFL record for the most touchdown passes in a single regular season at 50. In 2007, the Associated Press named him Male Athlete of the Year, the first time an NFL player had been honoured since Joe Montana in 1990. Safe to say, he’s a pretty good football player.

If football hadn’t have worked out, he could have fallen back on baseball. Brady was drafted as a catcher in the Major League Baseball draft by the Montreal Expos in 1995.

Or, if he had decided against sports entirely, he could have entered show business. He’s hosted Saturday Night Live, modeled and is married to a supermodel. (Though I’m betting his sports stardom helped pave the way for those gigs.)

But what does Tom Brady have to do with insurance? In an interview with ESPN, Brady tearfully recounted NFL Draft day. Expecting to be picked in the second or third rounds, Brady and his family had to wait until the sixth round (199^th overall selection) to be drafted by the New England Patriots. In the video, Brady describes the emotion.

“When the Patriots called, I was so excited. I was like, “I don’t have to be an insurance salesman!” he said.

Brady’s dad was an “insurance salesman”, so maybe that’s all Brady meant? Regardless, to be fair, I suppose the difference between a career as a world-class professional athlete and an insurance salesman are huge, but is an insurance career really such a fallback position?

Boxer Mike Tyson (surely no biographical information is needed here) once told a reporter “Being a champion opens a lot of doors – I’d like to get a real estate license, maybe sell insurance.”

So maybe for “Iron” Mike Tyson, insurance isn’t so much a Plan B vocation, but one he could take a bite out of in his post-sporting life.

If you ask many of us mere mortals currently involved in the insurance industry how we got involved, chances are the answers will be varied. For some it was a long-standing desire to join a dynamic industry. However, I’m willing to guess that that group is not in the majority. For some, it was all about family ties. For some, it was a logical step from schooling in finance or law. And, undoubtedly for others, insurance has been a Plan B career. I ask you: is that really such a bad thing? Leave your comments here – I’d love to find out what you think.

Julie.

PS – As far as I know, Mike Tyson has not started a career in insurance yet. He raises and races pigeons as a hobby and for a television show on The Animal Planet network.

Print

Today’s guest post by BC injury claims lawyer Erik Magraken looks at the what expert evidence is needed to prove damages for the cost of future care in BC injury claims.

Enjoy and thanks, Erik.

-Julie.

Future Care Claims: What Expert Evidence Is Needed?

Useful reasons for judgment were released this week by the BC Court of Appeal discussing the type of expert evidence necessary to prove damages for cost of future care in a BC injury claim.

In this week’s case (Gregory v. ICBC) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2006 collision. At trial the Plaintiff sought damages including an award of $123,000 for cost of future care.  In support of this claim the Plaintiff relied on the opinion of an occupational therapist.  This aspect of the claim was largely rejected with the Court awarding just over $8,000 for this head of damage.

The Plaintiff appealed arguing the trial judge erred in rejecting the evidence of the occupational therapist suggesting a medical doctors evidence was necessary for this aspect of the claim.   The BC Court of Appeal agreed in part and increased the assessment by $30,000.  In doing so the Court provided the following useful reasons addressing the type of expert evidence needed to advance a future care claim:

[38] Courts do accept testimony from a variety of health care professionals as to necessary and reasonable costs of future care: Jacobson v. Nike Canada Ltd. (1996), 19 B.C.L.R. (3d) 63, 133 D.L.R. (4th) 377 (S.C.) at para. 182; in which Levine J. (as she then was) said:

[182]    The test she enunciated does not, in my view, require that the evidence of the specific care that is required by the plaintiff be provided by a medical doctor. In Milina v. Bartsch, McLachlin J. accepted the evidence of a rehabilitation expert as to the type of care that should be provided.

See also: Aberdeen v. Zanatta, 2008 BCCA 420 at paras. 43-53, 63; Rizzolo v. Brett, 2010 BCCA 398 at paras. 72-83.

[39] I do not consider it necessary, in order for a plaintiff to successfully advance a future cost of care claim, that a physician testify to the medical necessity of each and every item of care that is claimed.  But there must be some evidentiary link drawn between the physician’s assessment of pain, disability, and recommended treatment and the care recommended by a qualified health care professional:  Aberdeen at paras. 43, 63…

[46] And, there was a consensus among the physicians that Ms. Gregory has difficulty lifting above shoulder height, difficulty with prolonged heavy or repetitive motion above shoulder level, and that in general she will continue to have persistent pain and weakness.

[47] The evidence of the physicians does therefore provide some evidentiary basis for the recommendations for assistance with heavy housework, and yard maintenance.  In my view the trial judge fell into error by failing to consider these claims on the basis only that, “there are no recommendations from the medical practitioners for housekeeping assistance, or home and yard maintenance … ”.

[48] Rather than remit this question to the trial judge, I am of the view that it is appropriate for this Court to substitute an appropriate award under this head of damages.

[49] That part of Ms. Percy’s recommendations in which she estimated assistance for heavy home and yard maintenance is set out above.  I would substitute an award of $30,000 over and above the amount already awarded under this head of damages.  This represents a reasonable assessment of the present value of the cost of some modest assistance with the housework, and yard maintenance, that Ms. Gregory could not perform herself in a reasonable manner, as a consequence of the impairment in her shoulder.

Print

Today’s guest post by BC injury claims lawyer Erik Magraken looks at the “harsh” reality of Part 7 Benefits Deductions in ICBC injury claims.

Enjoy and thanks, Erik.

-Julie.

More on the “Harsh” Reality of Part 7 Benefits Deductions in ICBC Tort Claims

Two Judgments were recently released by the BC Supreme Court discussing the “harsh” reality of Part 7 Benefits Deductions in ICBC Injury Claims.

As previously discussed, if you are entitled to receive Part 7 Benefits under your policy of insurance and don’t pursue these a Defendant who is responsible for injuring you in a BC Motor Vehicle Collision can reduce the amount of damages that they have to pay you by the amount of benefits you should have received from your own insurance coverage.  Often after trial ICBC will argue that some of the awarded damages should be reduced for this reason.  The first of the two recent judgments demonstrates that these deductions could operate in a punishing way for Plaintiffs.

In the first case released this week (Kirk v. Kloosterman) the Plaintiff suffered “catastrophic and tragic” injuries in a motor vehicle collision.  The Plaintiff, who had a learner’s licence to operate a motorcycle, failed to obtain a full licence at the end of his probation period and for this reason was considered uninsured by ICBC.  He was struck by a vehicle operated by the Defendant and suffered serious injuries.  He became paralyzed from near the waistline down.  His spinal cord became infected while in hospital and this “literally chewed up a further portion of the spinal cord so that he has lost a great deal of his thoracic capacity and now his arms and shoulders must bear his weight and provide all his strength“.

A jury found the Plaintiff 15% at fault for the collision and the Defendant 85% at fault.   Damages of nearly $4 million were awarded less 15% to reflect the Plaintiff’s liability.   Following verdict the Defendant (who was insured with ICBC) applied to have some of these damages reduced because the Plaintiff was allegedly in breach of his no-fault plan with ICBC.   Mr. Justice Crawford granted the motion and reduced the damages by approximately $200,000.  In doing so the Court noted that while this was “harsh and even punitive” a Plaintiff who disentitles himself to his own ICBC coverage can be faced with a statutory deduction in their tort claim.  Mr. Justice Crawford provided the following reasons:

[]           Ms. Kloosterman says the law is clear and settled: if the plaintiff acts so as to disentitle himself, then the Court must calculate and apply the deduction. She argues that Mr. Kirk would have been entitled to benefits under Part 7, had he possessed a valid driver’s licence.

[]           It is plain that the legislative intention is to prevent double recovery, that is, to prevent a plaintiff from recovering the same amount of monies both by way of the defendant through a tort action and by way of no-fault insurance coverage. Given the legislative intention, it seems harsh and even punitive to not only deny a plaintiff, who has been found substantially not at fault in a motor vehicle collision and awarded damages for losses sustained, no-fault benefits but also to deduct the amount of his or her potential entitlement to Part 7 from the tort award. However, the case law is binding on me, and can only be construed differently by the Court of Appeal:  see Baart v. Kumar, (1985), 66 B.C.L.R. 1 (C.A.); Si v. Enns, , 2001 BCSC 1120.

[]           Accordingly, I accept the defendant’s submissions on this issue and find that there must be a deduction.

In the second case released this week (Gignac v. Rozylo) the result was not nearly as harsh but the case still demonstrates the reality that applications for statutory deductions can be made following vehicle collision cases.

In Gignac the Plaintiff was injured in a 2004 motor vehicle collision.  Following trial Mr. Justice Wilson awarded damages including $15,000 for ‘special damages‘ and just over $115,000 for ‘costs of future care‘. ICBC then argued that these awards should be reduced by $25,000 to account for the fact that the Plaintiff can obtain money from ICBC for these expenses under their own policy of insurance.

Mr. Justice Wilson largely rejected ICBC’s arguments and made a modest deduction of $2,000 of the awarded damages.  In doing so the Court provided the following useful comments about the “level of abstraction” of ICBC’s permissive benefits scheme:

[23]        As I understand Ms. Lewko, if a benefit is not “specifically listed”, then, an insured’s entitlement to the benefit is dependent upon “ICBC claims handling procedures”, or “ICBC claims handling policies”, or “ICBC policy”.

[24]        Legislative support for this approach is s. 88(2)(f), the “other” category, referred to above.

[25]        The statute does not direct me to determine entitlement to benefits pursuant to ICBC policy; the direction is to determine entitlement pursuant to the plan.

[26]        Section 88(2)(f) is subject to the opinion of the corporation’s medical advisor that an expenditure is likely to promote the rehabilitation of an insured.

[27]        The opinion of that medical advisor is a necessary condition before resort may be had to s. 88(2)(f) of the Regulation.  Absent the necessary condition, the corporation is not authorized to pay benefits.

[28]        Rehabilitation means restoration.  This plaintiff’s debilitating condition is chronic pain.  Current medical science has no cure for this condition.  I find it improbable that a medical advisor would opine that any of the goods and services contained in the assessment of future care costs, would promote the rehabilitation of this plaintiff.  Those goods are services were recommended by the occupational therapist as necessary to enable this plaintiff to maintain an optimum level of functioning, now and in the future, and to maximize independence and prevention of further disability.

[29]        Alternatively, if I am wrong in my interpretation of the legislation, and ICBC policy is a relevant factor, then the applicant has not persuaded me that it is more likely than not that this plaintiff is entitled to the benefits in controversy.  The scales are evenly balanced.  Policy may authorize the benefit or it may not.  According to Ms. Lewko:

11.       It is ICBC policy that the exercise of discretion for permissive benefits must be rationally connected to the relevant factors governing an objective assessment of the entitlement to the benefit.

That is a level of abstraction which does not allow for a determination of entitlement on a balance of probability.

[30]        In result, the cost of future care assessment is reduced by $2,000.

Print

We’ve been so happy to hear from many of our viewers through comments on stories, calls to our toll-free comments line (1-877-703-2713) and various emails. Through your feedback, we’ve been able to work harder to make sure that you are getting all you can out of ILSTV.

But there’s certainly more we can do. We want to hear more about what you think about ILSTV, the newsletters, the website, the content and even the insurance industry in general.

We’ve created a short survey to help us get to know you better. From now until April 4, you can share your opinions and have a chance to win! As always, participating in this survey is completely optional and all responses will remain anonymous.

Get started here.

Why should I complete this survey?
Your feedback helps us continue to provide the most relevant content for you.  We value your opinions and are looking forward to hearing them in this survey.

How long will it take?
There are 15 quick questions. All told, it should take you 5 – 10 minutes.

What do I get for completing this survey?
If you choose, you can be entered into a draw to win a $25 gift certificate to your choice of a number of popular online and bricks-and-mortar shops.

Thanks!

Julie.

Print

If you’ve ever witnessed a car accident, you know it can be a traumatic event. The courts can award damages to witnesses, but as you’ll see in this guest post from BC injury claims lawyer Erik Magraken, there are some limits.

-Julie.

PTSD Claim By Accident Witness Dismissed as “Too Remote”

If a witness to a BC motor vehicle collision suffers psychological injuries as a result of what they see they can claim damages.  There are, however, restrictions on when these claims can succeed.  Reasons for judgement were released today addressing this area of law.

In today’s case (Deros v. McCauley) the Plaintiff witnessed a collision caused by an “inebriated” driver in 2001.  At the time the Plaintiff was working on Highway 97 near Bear Lake, BC.  The Plaintiff was installing rumble strips on the side of the highway.  The Plaintiff was operating a sweeper and his friend, (Mr. Lance) was operating a grinder nearby.  The Defendant lost control of a pickup truck and collided with the grinder.  The Plaintiff witnessed the crash and was concerned for his friend.  Fortunately Mr. Lance “was not seriously injured“.

The Plaintiff claimed the incident caused PTSD and sued for damages.  The Insurance company for the Defendant argued that even if the Plaintiff suffered from PTSD this injury was ‘too remote‘ and therefore not compensable.  Madam Justice Gerow agreed and dismissed the lawsuit.  In doing so the Court provided the following useful reasons addressing the restricted circumstances when a witness to a crash can successfully sue for psychological damages:

[17]         In order to show that the damage suffered is not too remote to be viewed as legally caused by Mr. McCauley’s negligence, Mr. Deros must show that it was foreseeable that a person of ordinary fortitude would suffer a mental injury from witnessing the accident. He has failed to do so…

[23]         The cases, to which I was referred, where damages for nervous shock have been awarded to witnesses of accidents who were not physically involved in the accidents, involve accidents or events which are more shocking than the accident in this case. All the cases involved accidents in which someone has died or been seriously injured: James v. Gillespie, [1995] B.C.J. No. 442 (S.C.); Arnold v. Cartwright Estate, 2007 BCSC 1602; Easton v. Ramadanovic Estate (1988), 27 B.C.L.R. (2d) 45; Stegemann v. Pasemko, 2007 BCSC 1062; James v. Gillespie, [1995] B.C.J. No. 442 (S.C.); Kwok v. British Columbia Ferry Corp. (1987), 20 B.C.L.R. (2d) 318 (S.C.).

[24]         As set out in Devji v. District of Burnaby, 1999 BCCA 599 at para. 75, the courts have been careful to limit the circumstances in which injuries for nervous shock are awarded:

The law in this province, as formulated by Rhodes, requires that the plaintiffs, in order to succeed, must experience something more than the surprise and other emotional responses that naturally follow from learning of the death of a friend or relative. Instead, there must be something more that separates actionable responses from the understandable grief, sorrow and loss that ordinarily follow the receipt of such information. In Rhodes, Taylor and Wood JJ.A. described the requisite experience as alarming and startling (and therefore sudden and unexpected), horrifying, shocking and frightening, and Southin J.A. referred to a “fright, terror or horror”.

[25]         In this case, Mr. Deros witnessed a collision that involved no serious injuries. Even if I accept Mr. Deros’ evidence at trial that he initially thought a rod had skewered Mr. Lance, he knew within minutes this did not occur and Mr. Lance had not suffered serious injury….

[29]         There is no evidence that a person of ordinary fortitude would have suffered nervous shock injury or mental illness as a result of witnessing this accident. The experts testified about Mr. Deros’ particular reaction to the accident, but not that a person of ordinary fortitude would have suffered mental injury.

[30]         Mr. Deros does not argue that a person of ordinary fortitude would suffer mental injury from witnessing this accident. Rather, Mr. Deros argues that the evidence from the experts establishes that he was more prone to suffer from PTSD than an ordinary person was from witnessing this accident. As stated earlier, Mr. Deros argues that the evidence supports a finding he suffered mental or psychological injury from witnessing this accident because he was more prone to injury as a result of his pre-existing condition, i.e. he was a thin skull, and was not a person of ordinary fortitude.

[31]         Having failed to establish that a person of ordinary fortitude would suffer a mental injury from witnessing this accident, it follows that Mr. Deros’ claim must fail.

Print

The Green Bay Packers  have won Super Bowl XLV but the real winners are still to emerge, as television viewers and marketing gurus will choose their favourite commercials of the telecast.

Fox aired the game and charged about USD $3 million for 30 seconds of ad time during the football final. While that kind of advertising budget puts a Super Bowl spot out of reach for many businesses, some find it pays in dividends.

Last year, vacation rental website Homeaway.com launched its first Super Bowl ad. Helped perhaps by its cast – Chevy Chase and Beverly D’Angelo seemingly reprising their National Lampoon movie roles – the company reported that visits to its website spiked and the company recouped 60 to 70 percent of the cost of the commercial.

For years, many viewers have found that the advertisements are just as big of a draw as the football game. It’s a marketer’s dream. This year, all 68 ad spots sold out in October. (Last year, some slots remained until six days before kickoff.) Some companies launch campaigns, others offer giveaways, some use cute animals to sell their wares and others rely on celebrity endorsements. Sometimes they become classics and sometimes their age shows after a few years. Will this year’s Volkswagen/Darth Vader ad become a classic or will it fade as others have?

Cases in point: Some insurance-related Super Bowl spots from the past 35 years.

In 1976, New York Life created a Super Bowl ad that meshed football with the message that women can benefit from life insurance, too:

Print

Happy Groundhog Day! To many, this is the day we find out  – via Punxsutawney Phil in Pennsylvania, Wiarton Willie in Ontario, Shubenacadie Sam in Nova Scotia or any of the dozens of other famed woodchucks – if winter is on its way out or here for another six weeks.

But, for movie fans like me, Groundhog Day is also the 1993 comedy starring Bill Murray and directed by Harold Ramis.

The gist, for those who may not have seen it: Murray’s character is a TV meteorologist called Phil Connors. He travels to Pennsylvania to cover the annual Groundhog Day festivities. A blizzard forces him to stay in town for an extra night, but Phil wakes up and finds that he is reliving February 2. Every day plays out the same, and only Phil is aware of this.

Along the way, Phil runs – repeatedly – into Ned, a life insurance salesman.

Ned is not exactly  portrayed in the most flattering of lights, but surely that’s due to his personality and not so much his job, right? Well, who knows. Hollywood has not always been kind to the insurance industry, playing up stereotypes of boring, stuffy insurance salespeople.

In a more recent movie – the animated super-hero tale The Incredibles from Pixar – Bob Parr was “Mr. Incredible”, but after saving the life of a suicidal man who didn’t want to be saved, he is sued. Backlash from the lawsuit forces all superheroes to stop saving the world, so they must all rejoin the civilian world. Mr. Incredible takes a desk job with an insurance company. His joy for his job is obviously lacking.

[Sorry, video removed!]

And a new insurance-related movie is coming to theatres this month. Cedar Rapids features a naïve insurance agent who has never left his hometown, never stayed in a hotel, but things change when he’s sent to represent his company at the annual insurance convention. Here’s the trailer:

That’s just a small sampling of some of the portrayals of insurance professionals in Hollywood movies.

Does the industry and the people that work in it get a bad rap?

Why is it so easy for screenwriters to give the boring or dowdy characters careers in insurance?

Are there any examples of movies that celebrate the industry and the people in it?

I’d love to hear what you think – and tell me about your favourite (or most reviled) insurance-related film.

Julie.

Print

Does a relaxed workplace dress code mean a relaxed work ethic? Can an employee who wears blue jeans and a t-shirt be in a management position, or is that reserved for his or her besuited coworker? And what does “business casual” actually mean, anyway?

There’s no doubt that a person’s physical appearance makes an immediate impact, but in a work economy where you can be thousands of kilometres away from coworkers and clients, does it really matter what you’re wearing?

Earlier this week I came across this article from the Canadian Press and found that, at least at UBS, dress codes are still in effect in parts of the world. Take a read:

Swiss bank UBS trims much mocked employee dress code

Swiss bank UBS AG is revising its dress code after getting roundly mocked for suggesting employees wear skin-coloured underwear and avoid garlic breath.

The bank said Monday it is whittling down its 44-page style guide to a more modest booklet that will concentrate on how to impress customers with a polished presence and sense of Swiss precision and decorum.

“We’re reviewing what is important to us,” UBS spokesman Andreas Kern told The Associated Press.

The existing code tells female employees how to apply makeup, what kind of perfume to wear and what colour stockings and lingerie are acceptable. It advises them not to show roots if they colour their hair and to avoid black nail polish.

“You can extend the life of your knee socks and stockings by keeping your toenails trimmed and filed,” UBS tells its female staff. “Always have a spare pair: stockings can be provisionally repaired with transparent nail polish and a bit of luck.”

Men are told how to knot a tie as well as to get a haircut every month and avoid unruly beards and earrings.

Both sexes were advised to avoid garlic or onion breath.

“Glasses should always be kept clean,” the code instructs. “On the one hand this gives you optimal vision, and on the other hand dirty glasses create an appearance of negligence.”

The guidelines recommended skin-coloured underwear for women and wristwatches for all to signal “trustworthiness and a serious concern for punctuality.”

The guide prompted derision and disbelief when it first surfaced last month.

“People made fun of UBS,” Kern told Swiss weekly Sonntag. “But it didn’t cause any damage to our reputation.”

He declined Monday to give specific examples of the dress-code revisions.

The bank, the largest in Switzerland, has a history of providing detailed advice for its employees. A handbook for bank trainees gives a country-by-country behaviour guide.

In Russia, it tells employees to be prepared to hold your drink at business engagements and to “never reject an invitation to the sauna.”

In the United States, “never criticize the president.”

And in Latin America, “turning up before an appointment might even be considered rude.”

So the Swiss bank cares about their employees’ dress. What about the rest of the world? An Ipsos Global @dvisory survey polled workers in 24 countries and explores what type of attire people around the world are wearing to work, what is considered acceptable (and unacceptable) in the workplace, and whether business attire really does make an individual more productive. Some highlights:

• One quarter (26%) of workers wear a type of uniform on the job… one third (34%) of workers wear business/smart dress on the job… and four in ten (40%) workers wear casual attire on the job
• Four in ten workers (38%) have an employer that has a day or time specifically set aside for casual wear during the working hours that normally would be otherwise

• 45% of workers think someone wearing casual work clothes is more productive in their job than someone wearing a more prescribed workplace or business attire… but 55% of workers believe someone wearing a more prescribed workplace or business attire is more productive in their job than someone wearing casual work clothes

• Only one quarter (24%) of workers say it’s appropriate to wear shorts to work

• One in five (21%) workers says it’s appropriate to wear thong sandals (flip‐flops) to work

• Only four in ten (37%) workers say casual workers in their workplace will never make it into senior management

• Only one in five (20%) employees think casual dressers in their workplace are “slackers”

• A majority (56%) say a Speedo/Bikini bathing suit are appropriate wear at an employee beach/picnic function

• Two thirds (66%) of workers say senior managers that run an organization should always be more dressed up than their employees

What’s your take on dressing for work? Do you suit up or go with a more casual look? Or, are you one of the 56% who thinks wearing a Speedo at a work event is just fine? I look forward to your comments!

-Julie.

Print

I’m passing this Post Script entry on to BC ICBC injury claims lawyer Erik Magraken.  Enjoy and thanks, Erik!

-Julie.

Cross Examination Beats Up RCMP Officer’s Injury Claim

As previously discussed, cross examination is one of the most important tools in a trial lawyer’s arsenal.  This tool can be used both during examination for discovery and trial.  Cross examination can be used to explore and weaken an opponent’s case.  Reasons for judgment were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, New Westminster Registry, harshly criticizing an RCMP officer and largely rejecting his injury claim based on evidence elicited during an extensive cross examination.

In today’s case (Lee v. Jarvie) the Plaintiff was involved in a rear-end collision in 2004.  Fault for the crash was admitted.  The trial focused on the value of the Plaintiff’s claim.  The Plaintiff was in the midst of applying for the RCMP at the time of the crash.  He was injured but fortunately was able to complete his application and training and went on to be successfully employed with the police force.

ICBC accepted that the Plaintiff was injured but argued that his injury claim was exaggerated challenging “the authenticity of (the Plaintiff’s) claim“.  Mr. Justice Gaul largely accepted this argument and dismissed a significant portion of the claim.  The below are some of the critical words the Court had of the Plaintiff:

[46] Mr. Lee was vigorously cross-examined by counsel for the defendants. By “vigorous” I do not mean the questioning was improper or disrespectful of the witness. I find the extensive cross-examination of Mr. Lee successfully revealed a number of significant and illuminating facts that, but for their disclosure, the court would have been left with an inaccurate impression and understanding of Mr. Lee’s situation and condition…

[71] In addition to eliciting important facts that have placed Mr. Lee’s claim in a more fulsome context, counsel for the defendants was also able to expose a number of contradictions and inconsistencies in Mr. Lee’s evidence, of which I will address but a few…

[81] While I am hesitant to find Mr. Lee fabricated his evidence on this point, I do find him to be an unreliable and inaccurate historian with respect to the amount and frequency of medication he has been taking…

[86] In great measure I agree with the submission of the defence that Mr. Lee’s evidence shifted during the course of his testimony and at times contradicted what he had said previously at his examination for discovery. On occasion I also found myself simply disbelieving Mr. Lee….(some of his evidence) stretches the boundaries of belief beyond their limits…

[87] In general, I found Mr. Lee to be less than forthright during his evidence and on more than one occasion I found him to be deliberately evasive in answering the question asked of him…

[89] It was only on account of detailed and probing cross-examination that a number of important and salient facts relating to Mr. Lee’s claim were disclosed or clarified. These details placed Mr. Lee’s claim in a markedly different light to the one based solely on what he said in his examination-in-chief. This, in conjunction with the inconsistencies or contradictions that were exposed in Mr. Lee’s evidence, compels me to approach his evidence with caution and skepticism. In general, I am not satisfied with Mr. Lee’s evidence. Unless I have indicated otherwise in these reasons, where there is a conflict between Mr. Lee’s evidence and that of another witness, I have given greater weight to the evidence of the other witness.

Further to my previous posts on credibility, cases such as today’s are worth reviewing in full to get a sense of the types of factors trial judges take into consideration in weighing the evidence of a party.  Today’s case in particular is a good introduction to cross examination in injury claims because the Court reproduces extensive portions of the Plaintiff’s cross examination and explains the damaging effect this had on his credibility.

Print

I think winter is officially here. Cases in point:

1. Here are some pictures of my car, from yesterday morning.

2.  London, Ontario received as much as 95 cm of snow in three days.

3. It’s December and it’s expected.

Last week we reported that Ontario MPP Bill Mauro introduced a Private Member’s Motion that would call for the insurance industry to reduce auto premiums for drivers who have winter tires installed. (See that story here: Motion to reduce insurance premiums for drivers with winter tires)

I’ve lived in Ontario for over a decade now and have put winter tires on my car every year. (You can see from my photo that I’ve – luckily – already had them put on this year.) Mauro’s proposition has brought quite a bit of debate with it.

Knox Insurance Brokers’ Randy Bushey joins ILSTV as the guest poster this week. Here are his thoughts on the topic. Thanks, Randy!

-Julie.

PS – What do you think about the idea of insurance discounts for winter tire usage?

Snow tires for insurance discount – why the idea won’t get much traction

The Ontario legislature is considering a private member’s bill, recently introduced to encourage the automobile insurance industry to give premium discounts to those using snow tires.  The bill – if passed – is non-binding.

And it won’t have any tangible effect.  Here’s why:

• Ontario’s insurers – over 75 of them – are struggling to climb out of a deep hole and back to profitability.  That was verified by government-audited stats, resulting  in the McGuinty Liberals’ massive overhaul of the healthcare side of mandatory coverage, significantly reducing benefits (effective September 1^st, 2010).  Consequently, no insurer is looking to give back premium any time soon.

• On the surface, it sounds logical for better equipped cars to be rewarded with lower premiums.  But, Ontario is a no-fault environment meaning that most injuries and the majority of damage gets paid for by that vehicle’s insurer, regardless of fault.  So if my vehicle is equipped with snow tires (which it is), but another driver slides through an intersection colliding with my car, my insurer still pays.

• And how does an insurer verify if snow tires are in fact installed?  Do over-worn snow tires provide better grip than new “all-season” tires?  Do drivers always understand the difference between snow tires and “all-seasons”?

Note to politicians: snow tires are a good idea for winter traction – but the insurance industry is not going to voluntarily subsidize the practice.

Randy Bushey, CIP, is the General Manager of Knox Insurance Brokers Ltd. in North Bay, Ontario. You can find his blog – The Risk Factor – here: http://www.theriskfactor.ca/

Print

For the past few years, ILSTV has been bringing you daily insurance news. You’ve responded well, leaving comments on articles and reposting news to your friends and coworkers. We are very grateful that you have been choosing ILSTV as your source for industry news and information, but we want to get to know you a bit more so we can make sure you’re getting the most relevant content possible.

First, where are you? Answer this quick, one-question, <12-second poll and let us know where in the world you are! Of course, participation is completely optional and we won’t tie your information to you specifically.

Regardless of where in the world you are, thank you for continuing to read, watch and discuss ILSTV news.

-Julie.

Print

I still vividly remember the day I received a letter of acceptance from my first choice of universities, congratulating me on gaining entry into my first choice of undergraduate programs. I was a keen-to-learn 17 year old, ready to tackle the world head on. And I did. After four years of early morning classes and into-the-night studying, I walked across the stage to collect my degree and haven’t looked back.

My degree has served me well. It’s given me a great foundation to build upon and has equipped me with highly transferrable and relevant skills and knowledge. (For the curious, I received my Bachelor of Journalism from Carleton University in Ottawa – go Ravens!)

But not everyone shares my degree of degree satisfaction. A recent CareerBuilder survey found that one-third of workers wish they had majored in something different in college or university. More than one-in-four (26 percent) said the market for jobs in their chosen field worsened from the time they entered college and when they graduated.  This survey was conducted among more than 2,000 workers with post-secondary degrees between August 17 and September 2, 2010.

While more than half (56 percent) of all U.S. workers with college degrees reported they found a job in their desired career path within one year of graduation, others’ pursuits still haven’t come to fruition.  Nearly one-in-five (19 percent) of all workers with a college degree still have not found a job in their desired field.

More than one-in-four workers (27 percent) who graduated from college ten years ago or longer reported they still haven’t found a job related to their college major.  Twenty-one percent said it took them three years or longer to find an opportunity in their desired career path while one-in-ten (12 percent) said it took five years or longer.

Building new skill sets is a priority for more than one-in-ten (13 percent) workers who said they have plans to go back to school this year to make themselves more marketable.

Rosemary Haefner, CareerBulder’s VP of Human Resources offers the following tips for workers who want to pursue more education:

• Talk to HR – If you’re currently employed, many organizations offer some type of learning program. Whether it’s classes taught on-site at your company, courses and seminars across the country or reimbursement for graduate school programs, your HR department can help you decide what is the best fit for your goals.
• Leverage the Web – Sometimes, you don’t even have to leave your home to hone your skills. Many sites offer a wide variety of learning opportunities, such as CBInstitute.com, or consider applying to an online university.
• Take advantage of local resources – Many local libraries and community centers offer classes in everything from basic Internet skills to foreign languages. Ask around your community to see what opportunities exist.

ILScorp offers hundreds of hours of online continuing education options. Whether you need to obtain your CE credits to keep your license, want take some personal and professional development courses, or wish to advance your insurance career by getting your CAIB designation, ILScorp can help. Check out www.ilscorp.com or call 1-800-404-2211 to continue your education path.

Tell me, are you satisfied with your post-secondary choices? Do you feel your decision to study one discipline (or go a different route entirely) has helped your career?

The insurance industry seems particularly hospitable to varied educational backgrounds. There are job opportunities for those who are math- and numbers-minded, and options for people

See how some current industry professionals leveraged their backgrounds into careers in the insurance industry – click here.

If you want to help a student get involved in the insurance industry – in any capacity – consider sponsoring them with the Canadian Insurance Scholarship Program.

-Julie.

Print

I like Twitter. It’s been a great way to connect with people from all over the world and from many industries. The insurance industry seems to be doing pretty well in terms of a Twitter presence; lots of the industry’s biggest companies are using the social networking site (see Allstate, ICBC , BCAA, Lloyd’s of London and Travelers as just a few examples. Of course, ILScorp and ILSTV also have a presence!) But what about Twitter for brokers or agents? Is there a benefit to tweeting, or is it a time waster?

Ryan Hanley is an insurance professional at Guilderland Agency in Albany, New York. He’s also somewhat of a social media champion for the insurance industry. (Find him on Twitter here , or on Facebook here. His insurance blog is here.)

He has let me repost his great blog post called “5 Ways I Use Twitter as an Insurance Agent”. Take a look through and see how Twitter may be able to help your brokerage, agency or business.

Thanks, Ryan!

Julie.

5 Ways I Use Twitter as an Insurance Agent
By Ryan Hanley

Twitter is an interesting monster.  Everyone focuses on the 140 characters.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard, “My life doesn’t fit in 140 characters.”

My response, “Be more creative!”

Twitter is not the red-headed step-child of Social Media like many new or unfamiliar the with Inter-Web make it out to be.  On the contrary, Twitter might be the MOST power Social Media tool out there excluding your blog (No debate your blog is social media headquarters).

5 Ways I Use Twitter As An Insurance Agent

1) Drip Marketing For My Blog Posts

When I write a new blog post the very first thing I do once I’ve hit the Publish button is Tweet the post (I actually have a WordPress Plugin that does this automatically but it’s still the first thing).  I want the post title and link out on the Inter-Web.  Once your post is in the Twitter feed people can Re-Tweet, Comment, Share, etc with all their friends.  I also have a Plugin on my blog that will grab an old blog post and Tweet it as if new every two hours (Tweet Old Post).  This keeps information I created a year ago continually in front of current and potential clients.

2) Follow Local and National Business News

In order to be effective in the insurance business you need to always be up-to-date on what is going on in the business world on both the local and national level.  There is such a negative perception of the insurance business (Which is entirely unwarranted) throughout the general public that politicians at every level find attacking our profits an easy mark.  Staying aware of the economic conditions and legislation always looming over the insurance business is a must.

3) Re-Tweet (Re-Post) Clients & Prospects Marketing Messages

People ask me all the time how you “Do Business” on Twitter.  If you want to do business with a prospect, what is the Number One, the Numero Uno way to get their attention? Anyone? If you answered, Send Them A Referral, then you are a winner (If you didn’t know that start reading John Jantsch).  I have a Private List (Click on the link for information on Twitter Lists) of all my clients and a separate Private List of all my prospects on Twitter.  I watch both lists.  Anytime I can help either of them by referring business, a service provider, another professional, whatever…. Whenever I can add value to them I do.  And an easy way to do that on a regular basis is Re-Tweet their marketing messages.

4) Network with Insurance Professionals

My favorite part of Twitter is the insurance professionals that I have connected with (See Insurance Community Rocking the Social Web for a great list to get you started). These wonderful people have helped me in so many ways.  Besides being funny, and interesting, and some cases hysterically crazy, they are very good at what they do, Insurance & Marketing.  I’ve learned so much about the insurance business from the online insurance community its unbelievable.  Its weird to think but I consider myself friends with many people I have never even met…

5) Stay Up-To-Date On Latest Insurance Industry Trends

Insurance is a complicated business.  If you are not in “The Biz” then you probably just rolled your eyes and said “Yeah right Insurance is boring and stupid and you can buy it online so how complicated could it be,” and you would be a jerk.  Unless you live and breath insurance every day its hard to understand how dynamic the insurance industry actually is.  There are changes almost every week it seems and as dedicated independent agent we need to stay on top of changes.  So I follow all the Insurance trade journals, magazines, and websites out on the Inter-Web so that when change does happen I can take it to the street.

The Rub

Twitter is not just a 140 characters.  140 characters is the last thing that Twitter is.  True, 140 characters does make you use the creative side of your brain and I understand that is a debilitating limitation to some of you.  But I promise, if you take the time to really think about how you can utilize Twitter in your own business and industry the shade of online marketing will be drawn aside and the blissful glow of communication will brighten your world for ever more…

How do you use Twitter?

Are there industries that just have absolutely no use for the tool?

Thank you,

Ryan H.

Print

A friend of mine was recently in a car accident. Thankfully, everyone involved is physically okay, but there’s definitely some damage to each of the two cars involved. Now the matter is left with the insurer, and my friend isn’t sure what to expect in terms of division of fault and how it will affect his premium.

The topic of claims, fault and premiums has been on my mind since I was told about the accident, so it was great to come across this blog post from BC ICBC injury claims lawyer Erik Magraken. Take a look!

-Julie.

Who to Sue? ICBC Claims, Fault and Increased Insurance Premiums

When collisions occur in BC typically ICBC is the insurer for all involved.  After the collision ICBC internally decides who to blame and apportions the parties respective degree of fault.  Depending on the decision some of the motorists insurance premiums may rise.  If this happens to you and you disagree with ICBC who do you sue?

The conventional route is to sue the motorist alleged to be at fault for the crash.  The theory being that if another motorist is found at fault in a negligence claim they will be ordered to pay the faultless party’s accident related expenses including increased insurance premiums.  When an injury lawsuit is started its easy to add this additional damage to the claim.  In practice ICBC will honour a court decision respecting fault and overturn their internal decision if its inconsistent with the Court finding.

What if you are not making an injury claim and your only dispute is with ICBC and their apportionment of fault?  Is the offending motorist the only party you can sue to address ICBC’s decision?  The answer, apparently, is no and this was recently discussed by the BC Court of Appeal in reasons for judgement released earlier this year.

In the recent case of Innes v. Bui the Plaintiff sued the Defendant for injuries.  The case made it’s way to the BC Court of Appeal.  The appeal did not focus on increased insurance fees rather it concentrated on the legal doctrine of ‘res judicata’ (You can click here to read my previous article discussing this issue and giving more background on the case).   Despite the alternate focus of the case, Mr. Justice Low provided the following commentary about the proper parties to a lawsuit over increased ICBC insurance premiums:

[6] In her hand-written Notice of Claim, Ms. Bui, with the assistance of a translator, described the collision from her point of view and added, in understandably inexact English, “later ICBC had decided that my fault but they didn’t let me know until I renew my insurance, I think ICBC was unfair when they state that I at fault and I want to [contest against?] this decision”.  The claim was stated to be for “Extra money I had to pay for ICBC” and “return my 40% discount from my insurance – $1095”.  Ms. Bui later amended the Notice and pleaded that “… ICBC put the fault on me, as the result my insurance was up.  I wish to recover the money which ICBC made me pay”.  In completing the portion of the form which requires quantification of the claim, she wrote “Money I paid for ICBC – $1095”….

[31]         The reasons of the Small Claims judge fell well short of deciding the negligence question.  That issue remains alive in the Supreme Court action.  The res judicata arguments of both parties fail.

[32]         The above is enough to allow this appeal.  However, I would like to add a few more observations.

[33] In the Small Claims action, Ms. Innes was the wrong defendant.  She certainly was not a necessary defendant.  That action was not based in tort.  It was either in contract or under statute, or both, and the only issue raised by the pleadings was whether ICBC acted properly or reasonably in administratively assigning responsibility for the collision to Ms. Bui alone.  That was an issue only between Ms. Bui and ICBC.

Print