Accident Advisors, The Help you need when you need it most!

ACCIDENT ADVISORS

THE HELP YOU NEED WHEN YOU NEED IT MOST!
LARGEST CASH SETTLEMENT
ON PERSONAL INJURIES
 
Toronto Leading Accident Advisors
Years of Experience Dealing with Accident Claims
Contact Us for Free Consultation
 

INJURY LAWYERS MENU

Personal Injury Claim

Judge Rules Housekeeping Expenses not Subject to Threshold in Toronto Car Accident Claim

An Ontario judge has ruled in favor of accident victims in a recent decision that allowed a car accident victim to sue for housekeeping and home maintenance expenses, regardless of the severity of her injury.

In Ontario and the GTA (which includes Toronto, Mississauga, Brampton, Richmond Hills, Scarborough and Markham), insurance companies are protected from certain liabilities stemming from car accident injuries, through legal thresholds that deem victims can only sue for certain types of damages (including pain and suffering) if their injuries are ?serious?, ?important? and ?permanent?.

However Ontario Superior Court Justice George Valin noted that Bill 198 of the Insurance Act, which outlines the serious injury threshold (known also as simply ?the threshold?), makes no mention of housekeeping expenses.? He concluded that had the legislature intended for them to be subject to the threshold ?it could easily have added those claims to the categories of protected claims?.

"It is reasonable to infer that, by not having done so, the legislature intended that the exclusion of claims for future loss of housekeeping and home maintenance services in non-catastrophic cases from the categories of protected claims should stand," wrote Judge Valin.
The news came as a partial victory for the plaintiff, Ms. Sabourin, who suffered whiplash in a Toronto car accident.? She was suing the Toronto Dominion Insurance Company for $562,000, calculated to equal ?the present value of a lifetime of household services?.? Judge Valin determined her ability to conduct her own household duties was only impaired by 12.5 per cent, and awarded her a proportional total of $70,250 in damages.

Judge Valin noted, however, serious difficulties in interpreting the language of the Act, particularly when it came to defining ?important? injuries as those which ?substantially interfere with most of the usual activities of daily living, considering the person's age."? He wrote that Bill 198 fails to contain a list of activities of daily living, nor does it define the word 'most.'

TESTIMONIALS

We are very happy with how our case turned out. My wife was worried we would never see the money from my time lost at my job. I called you the day after my injury and from that point on, I felt very positive about our claim. My injury from a fall on a broken sidewalk turned into a out-of-the-court settlement, with recompense for hours lost at my job. We are impressed with your service.
Rajiv and Kavita A.
Brampton, Ontario
 
Thank you to you and your wonderful staff. I got a free claim evaluation and a settlement in the end worth more than I ever thought would come out of it. The easiest about the entire process was that I never felt I was going through everything alone.
Ingrid Van Hal
Brampton, ON
 
I got top settlement out of my case, and I owe it to these legal experts. They helped me when I thought no one could; even getting me compensation for time lost on the job.
Geoffrey Toh
Agin Court, Ontario
 

ACCIDENT RESOURCE