[{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org\/","@type":"BlogPosting","@id":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/october-25-2016-icbcs-approach-personal-injury\/#BlogPosting","mainEntityOfPage":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/october-25-2016-icbcs-approach-personal-injury\/","headline":"October 25, 2016:  ICBC\u2019s Approach to Personal Injury","name":"October 25, 2016:  ICBC\u2019s Approach to Personal Injury","description":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/Kash-Heed-Show-Manjot-Hallen-Interview-2016-10-24-1.mp3 Listen to the interview above or read the full transcript below. Kash: Well, you\u2019re probably wondering why your insurance rates are going up. We\u2019ve heard various explanations due to some of the collision repair companies charging a lot more money or various things like that. We have heard that due to some fraud, but […]","datePublished":"2016-10-25","dateModified":"2025-02-12","author":{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/author\/warnetthallen\/#Person","name":"Warnett Hallen LLP","url":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/author\/warnetthallen\/","identifier":8,"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/05de9a8db316c941221d843d580903732966b9f3f8c338734c57a8535aba495e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/05de9a8db316c941221d843d580903732966b9f3f8c338734c57a8535aba495e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","height":96,"width":96}},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Warnett Hallen LLP","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/logo.png","url":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/logo.png","width":406,"height":65}},"image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Manjot-and-Pulse-FM-1.png","url":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Manjot-and-Pulse-FM-1.png","height":"372","width":"638"},"url":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/october-25-2016-icbcs-approach-personal-injury\/","about":["Personal Injury Lawyer"],"wordCount":3917,"articleBody":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/Kash-Heed-Show-Manjot-Hallen-Interview-2016-10-24-1.mp3Listen to the interview above or read the full transcript below.Kash:Well, you\u2019re probably wondering why your insurance rates are going up. We\u2019ve heard various explanations due to some of the collision repair companies charging a lot more money or various things like that. We have heard that due to some fraud, but that\u2019s very few from what I know about this area. To learn a little bit about more about this, I\u2019m joined in studio by Manjot Hallen. He\u2019s a partner at Warnett and Hallen. He specializes in ICBC case settlements, he\u2019s a business and community leader, and he has 100,000 cases under his belt. Kind of concerned. We\u2019re all concerned that our ICBC rates are going up, but I don\u2019t believe that due to the fact that they\u2019re saying, \u201cWell, more and more people are committing fraud,\u201d or, \u201cIt\u2019s costing us more to fix the cars.\u201d I think there\u2019s a bit of that, but there\u2019s some other primary reasons, and that has to do with a lot of the settlements that they\u2019re having to pay out a fair amount of money on. Usually it\u2019s as a result of a court case versus their previous practice of settling through negotiations with the lawyer, Manjot.Manjot:That\u2019s right, Kash. First off, thanks for having me on your show. I appreciate that. You\u2019re correct. ICBC has been saying that it\u2019s fraud that\u2019s increasing your premium costs but if you look at the stats, the instances of fraud are few and far between. Furthermore, the other thing that they tend to say is that they increase premiums as a result of increased claims. Again, that is not the case. If you look at the stats, the claim costs have increased, that is true, but that\u2019s not the reason your premiums have gone up the extent that they have. The real issue here is the inefficiency at ICBC. The fact that they are pushing things towards litigation, they\u2019re paying more for their lawyers, they\u2019re not settling out of court like they used to, they\u2019re taking principal positions, and it\u2019s costing all of us more money as a result-Kash:But they\u2019re not looking at the cases per se. They\u2019re lumping it in, as you\u2019re saying, they\u2019re taking a principal approach to dealing with it. Fight it, fight it, fight it. I\u2019ve talked to several lawyers, and your company, Warnett and Hallen, you guys deal with this exclusively. Other corporations, they deal with it exclusively too and they tell me that previously, they would negotiate, they would work with the person that\u2019s making the claim. They would work with the adjuster, whoever makes the final decision at the end of the day, work with the other, if there\u2019s a lawyer assigned, come up with a settlement that\u2019ll meet the needs of that individual that\u2019s filing a claim. You don\u2019t have that anymore. I recall talking to several people when I was in government, and they said the change of practice is concerning because, for example, they were giving me cases where they tried to negotiate and they had a figure that was on the table. The end of the day, it went back to ICBC. ICBC said no, it went to trial, and ICBC ended up paying a lot more out.Manjot:We see it all the time, Kash. Look, the easy solution here is for people to put their heads together and come up with settlements that work and make sense, but ICBC has not been doing that. They take a look at a file, they come up with a number that doesn\u2019t make sense, and then they push things towards trial. You\u2019re absolutely right; nine times out of ten when these cases go to trial, ICBC ends up paying a lot more than they would have if they just settled outside of court.Kash:I don\u2019t understand that. Are they dealing with in-house lawyers or do they have \u201cdefend their position\u201d outsourced?Manjot:It\u2019s a little bit of both. There\u2019s a lot of in-house lawyers that they use, and they use external lawyers as well. You got to understand that a lot of times, these defense lawyers, the ones that are defending the claim, they\u2019re not the ones to blame. They actually give advice to ICBC saying, \u201cYou should settle this.\u201dKash:So who makes the decision? This is where I want to go because I was surprised and talking to someone that I know very well and I mentioned you. John Cameron was a colleague of mine in [placing 04:00] and now he has a personal injury practice also, was telling me that it\u2019s not the lawyer that\u2019s representing ICBC making the decision.Manjot:Yeah, you\u2019re right, Kash. Let\u2019s just use simple numbers. Let\u2019s say the defense lawyer tells ICBC, \u201cLook, you should settle this case for $15,000.\u201d They tell the adjuster that, and the adjuster completely ignores that advice because the adjuster has to go to his or her manager, and then oftentimes as you get closer to trial, they have to work by a committee and come up with a range in which they can settle the claim. Oftentimes, that range is less than what the lawyer, their lawyer, recommending.Kash:So the lawyer\u2019s not part of the committee who would make the decision at the end of the day?Manjot:Look, I\u2019ve never been a part of those committees so it\u2019s hard for me to say-Kash:So you\u2019ve never acted for ICBC?Manjot:I\u2019ve never acted for ICBC, but my understanding is as you get closer to trial, the defense lawyers do partake in those committees. Again, whether they\u2019re telling the adjuster over the phone that, \u201cYou should settle this case for $10,000\u201d or whether they\u2019re telling the entire committee, the advice is oftentimes completely ignored. ICBC says, \u201cNo, we should be settling this for $9,000.\u201d Then you end up going over trial, and at trial, the judge awards $15,000. That\u2019s where these additional costs come in.Kash:So if they go based on principle or based on a policy that \u201cwe\u2019re not going to settle outside; we\u2019re going to use the very expensive legal system to deal with it, and we\u2019re going to roll the dice there,\u201d they really don\u2019t care because they go back to the Utilities Commission and they get that increase each and every time, Manjot.Manjot:Absolutely, absolutely. That\u2019s the unfortunate thing here, is that they are willing to spend the extra money going to trial. What they do in return is they increase premiums, and they go to the Utilities Commission and they get that approved. That\u2019s what we\u2019re dealing with and that\u2019s the unfortunate circumstance that exists currently. The problem that I have, Kash, is that they blame increase claim [clause 06:03]. Claim clause have increased, there\u2019s no doubt about that, but not to the extent that they\u2019re making it out to be to justify the increased premiums.Kash:Well, this is concerning. You\u2019ve got Barry Penner, now chair of the ICBC board. I sat with him in government. He should get it, he should understand it. He shouldn\u2019t be a political hack for government on this and realize that he\u2019s a lawyer. He\u2019s a trained lawyer. You need to work within what is reasonable for not only the people that are making a claim, but what\u2019s reasonable for the taxpayers because again, at the end of the day, we\u2019re taxpayers. I\u2019ve got a reported 2,300 pedestrians hurt in BC car crashes every year. 70% in metro Vancouver. How does that work in a pedestrian making a claim?Manjot:Well, it\u2019s no different than making a claim if you were operating a motor vehicle. You were hit, you\u2019re not to blame. You have a valid claim.Kash:Let\u2019s say someone\u2019s cross-walking. I pay particular attention. I don\u2019t like the attitude of drivers here in British Columbia, and I pay particular attention when I\u2019m crossing a road, crossing a crosswalk, stopping even going through an intersection looking to see if someone\u2019s not driving through the intersection. Let\u2019s just say with the technology we have, someone\u2019s in a crosswalk using a mobile device and they are hit by a driver.Manjot:Well, it depends on whether or not they have the right of way. If you have the walk signal, then the driver should not have hit you, even if you\u2019re on a mobile device. Essentially if you\u2019re a pedestrian and you have the right of way, you have a valid claim. Where you get into trouble as a pedestrian who\u2019s hurt is if you\u2019re jaywalking, or if you\u2019re entering the intersection when you have the orange hand and you don\u2019t have the right of way. That\u2019s when you may or may not have a claim.Kash:It\u2019s alarming. 2,300 pedestrians hurt in BC car crashes. That\u2019s incredible. 70% in metro Vancouver. What do you think? You\u2019ve been involved in this litigation for quite a period of time. What is the most profound reason why we have such (\u2026)? Is it because we\u2019re a transportation [system 08:29]? Is it because of the fact that we\u2019re not paying particular attention? We\u2019re going to take a quick break on Pulse FM, but coming back, I\u2019ll ask you to answer some of those questions to give our listeners a bit of an idea, next on Pulse FM.2,300 pedestrians hurt in BC car crashes every year, 70% in metro Vancouver. Manjot, why do you think that is? You\u2019ve been involved in this from a litigation point of view for quite a period of time. Why do we have such an incredible amount of pedestrians hit by cars in BC? Is it because there are transportation systems? Lack of transportation systems? What is it? Technical devices or what?Manjot:That\u2019s definitely one of the reasons, is the lack of infrastructure here in metro Vancouver, the lack of a proper and functioning transit system if I can say so but there\u2019s other reasons as well. The increased population in metro Vancouver. It\u2019s way more congested than it was 10 years ago, and there\u2019s a lot of new drivers as well. People who are not necessarily trained as well as it used to be in how to operate a motor vehicle. The third and perhaps the biggest factor here is distracted drivers.Kash:Yes.Manjot:You had mentioned pedestrians using their mobile device, but the real issue is the person operating the vehicle using their mobile device. It\u2019s a huge issue.Kash:I brought in that law here in British Columbia, and part of that was prevention work done on it so people would apply the logic the same way they do with seatbelts. Very young kids put their seatbelt on at a very early age, and it kind of just goes in. It\u2019s natural for you to get in the car and put your seatbelt on. That was the prevention and education we wanted to put in place, but this going on, just increasing the fines or something like that, it doesn\u2019t really appear to be making a significant difference in the amount of distracted drivers we have out there.Manjot:I think the better analogy is drinking and driving. I think that\u2019s a better analogy when it comes to distracted driving as opposed to putting on a seatbelt because it\u2019s temptation. It\u2019s people doing something that they want to do and then ignoring the rules completely. That\u2019s what\u2019s going on here. People want to use their cellphone. People want to respond to text messages, they want to respond to emails. When you sit in a car and you put your seatbelt on, there\u2019s no trade off. People don\u2019t think, \u201cOh, I\u2019m giving something up by putting this seatbelt on,\u201d but when you put your phone away or you put it in the passenger seat and ignore it, you\u2019re giving something up. You\u2019re giving up your connection to people that you want to respond to.Kash:Well, so like drinking and driving, that\u2019s no longer an acceptable behavior in society and we just admonish people that do it. That\u2019s from a very early age, kids in school and stuff like that. Do we need the same thing with distracted driving. \u201cYou don\u2019t do that. You don\u2019t pick up your phone when you\u2019re in your car,\u201d almost like drinking and driving.Manjot:Absolutely. It has to have the same stigma as drinking and driving. Look, you\u2019re out at a bar. You drove there, you have four or five beers. Most of your friends are going to say, \u201cHey look man, you shouldn\u2019t be driving right now. You should put your keys away. Find a designated driver.\u201d I, of course, wouldn\u2019t find myself in that situation, but that\u2019s the kind of advice that you\u2019re going to get from your friends. If you\u2019re sitting at the bar, you\u2019re having an argument with your girlfriend, your husband, whatever the case may be, and you\u2019re texting the whole night, no one\u2019s going to say to you, \u201cHey-Kash:\u201cPut your phone away.\u201dManjot:\u201cMaybe you should put your phone away before you get in your car. Maybe you should think about that.\u201d Those discussions don\u2019t take place. We need to make it happen.Kash:That\u2019s part of the change of a societal behavior in this area. I\u2019m one to think that it\u2019s not a real deterrent to increase it to what they\u2019ve increased it. Let\u2019s talk a little bit about fraud cases because this garnishes headlines throughout the region, throughout the province when in fact, ICBC discloses that they\u2019ve got a fraud that has taken places for a period of time. How much does that impact our rates?Manjot:You know what? The real question is does it really exist to the extent that they make it out to exist. ICBC will oftentimes find something that they think is questionable, and they\u2019ll label it \u201cfraud.\u201d Nine times out of ten, that\u2019s not the case. They\u2019re calling lots of things fraud these days that shouldn\u2019t be considered fraud. They\u2019re saying someone who\u2019s taken an extra day off work, maybe that\u2019s fraud. Someone who is doing something, or trying to go back to the gym and they\u2019re caught going back to the gym, they\u2019re saying that\u2019s fraud. That\u2019s not fraud at all. That\u2019s just a normal course of a claim. People are out of commission for a period of time, and they do their best to get back on their feet. That\u2019s not fraud.Kash:So they think you\u2019re well enough. You don\u2019t have a claim with ICBC.Manjot:Exactly.Kash:You\u2019ve got that commercial that they\u2019ve been running of the guy out on his mountain bike and they\u2019re all watching him on their computer screens at supposedly at an ICBC office, but when you start to put that out there, it\u2019s almost saying to everyone that has a claim against ICBC, \u201cIf you can go back to some regular activity, it\u2019s a fraud.\u201dManjot:Exactly, and that\u2019s an extreme case as well that they portrayed in that advertisement.Kash:I wonder if that\u2019s an actual case. What, to sensationalize the fact that you\u2019re out there?Manjot:It totally does. That\u2019s not what happens. What happens is people try their best to get back on their feet. ICBC will take the position that as soon as you do something like that, that\u2019s it. You shouldn\u2019t be entitled to any further compensation for wage loss or whatever the case may be. You\u2019re absolutely right; they\u2019re sensationalizing this. They\u2019re making this to be a much bigger issue than it actually is. The end game, in my opinion, is to prevent people from retaining lawyers. Prevent people from exercising their right. If you\u2019re paying this much in premiums, as everyone is these days, on the other side of it, if you\u2019re injured in a motor vehicle accident, you should be entitled to compensation. Entitled to fair compensation.Kash:Let\u2019s talk a little bit about how you\u2019re treated when you file a claim with ICBC.Manjot:Well there\u2019s two different things, Kash. There\u2019s filing a legal claim, which you have to do within two years of an accident, and of course you\u2019re going to need a lawyer to do that. Then the other thing is just advising ICBC that you\u2019re presenting a claim for personal injury. That\u2019s done either on your own or with the assistance of a lawyer. That\u2019s the process that-Kash:But how do they look at it? If you\u2019re in a serious car accident or you\u2019ve got a claim you want to make to ICBC, should you try and do it yourself or should you go to a lawyer to help you or assist you in it?Manjot:Well, it\u2019s unfortunate that doing it yourself is not going to lead to a just result. What I tell my clients is, my job is not to try to get more than you deserve from ICBC. It\u2019s to try to get a fair settlement form ICBC. What you deserve according to the law, according to this jurisdiction. Unfortunately, if you don\u2019t have a lawyer, there\u2019s very little chance that you\u2019re going to achieve that result.Kash:At what point should you consider getting a lawyer? Initially, I think you make a phone claim to start and then you go from there. Should you go and should you meet with the adjuster? Should you meet with ICBC people? Should you talk to them? A lot of people don\u2019t know what the process is or what they should be doing.Manjot:My advice is that you should consult with a lawyer right away. You shouldn\u2019t even report the accident to ICBC. Here\u2019s what happens, Kash: you start giving ICBC information. They note everything down, and they begin using that information against you. The unfortunate situation that exists in this province is ICBC should be evaluating claims on their merit and compensating those who are injured, but instead, you get into this adversarial situation with them right away, the minute you report your claim. The minute you say you\u2019ve been injured, they start questioning it. They start noting where you said you\u2019ve been injured. If you say, \u201cI\u2019ve been injured, my neck and back hurts,\u201d and 10 weeks later, \u201cWell you know what? A week after the accident, my leg started hurting as well,\u201d they\u2019ll use the notes that they got right after the accident saying, \u201cWell after the accident, all you said was neck and back. Now you\u2019re complaining about your leg? That can\u2019t be related to the accident.\u201dYou have to be very careful in your dealings with ICBC. You have to be very careful what you say to them. Frankly, most people don\u2019t have the expertise to have those conversations with ICBC, so they should be consulting a lawyer from the onset.Kash:Your law firm Warnett and Hallen, where\u2019s that located?Manjot:It\u2019s in Vancouver. We just moved downtown. We were in Kitsilano but we\u2019re on the corner of Robson and Granville now. It\u2019s right across from the Nordstrom\u2019s Pacific Center.Kash:Okay, and your website?Manjot:It\u2019s www.warnetthallen.com.Kash:Easy one to remember. Warnetthallen.com. One last concern I want to talk to you about, and this came out in a court case recently where the ICBC lawyers did not disclose what they had on a particular case. They, using my term, \u201ccherry-picked\u201d what they were actually going to bring forward in the court process. How troubling is that in our legal system?Manjot:Well, I\u2019m troubled by that case, Kash, but I\u2019d like to believe it doesn\u2019t happen very often. That\u2019s an anomaly. The rules are that whatever information you have in your possession-Kash:Hey, you\u2019re a lawyer! What do you mean \u201cyou don\u2019t think happens that often?\u201dManjot:Well, the law is that whatever you have in your possession related to material fact has to be produced. I\u2019d like to believe that lawyers abide by those rules.Kash:But it didn\u2019t happen this time.Manjot:Like I said, that is an anomaly. I\u2019m not going to suggest that ICBC or their lawyers do anything to the contrary, that they do produce the documents that should be producing.Kash:Well, I think it was Ian [Malgrew 18:57] that wrote on that one. It\u2019s interesting; it troubled me.Manjot:It troubles me as well.Kash:I think it troubled a lot of people, but again, you have to wonder what is going on in the policy room at ICBC. What is going on in the committee? What is going on in the boards that are sitting to decide these?Manjot:I agree. A lot of the increased cost of premium is because of the inefficiencies at ICBC. Yes, there have been increased claim costs, but that\u2019s not the single factor that\u2019s increasing premiums. Yes, there\u2019s increased repair costs, but again, that\u2019s not the only factor that\u2019s increasing premiums. It\u2019s a lot of the inefficiencies at ICBC. The fact that they\u2019re pushing things towards trial, the fact that they\u2019re spending more on their lawyers when they could come up with a better result without all of that.Kash:Well, they\u2019re a bit of a cash cow for government because they\u2019re taking from the taxpayers the people that are buying their policies to insure their vehicles. At the same time, they\u2019re giving money back. Usually that\u2019s from the optional insurance side of it, which they not necessarily have a monopoly on, but they\u2019ve got a key area because it\u2019s a one place shop rather than trying to get private insurance coverage.Manjot:Absolutely, and I think it\u2019s just wrong to be blaming everything on fraud and increased claims. That couldn\u2019t be further from the truth. What\u2019s happening is they\u2019re essentially saying that you should pay these increased premiums, but when you\u2019re injured, you shouldn\u2019t exercise your right to have fair compensation. That\u2019s what it sounds like.Kash:Well concerning Manjot, a pleasure to have you in the studio. Look forward to having you back in the studio to talk about these issues and to make sure we hold ICBC accountable.Manjot:Thanks, Kash."},{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org\/","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"October 25, 2016:  ICBC\u2019s Approach to Personal Injury","item":"https:\/\/warnetthallen.com\/october-25-2016-icbcs-approach-personal-injury\/#breadcrumbitem"}]}]