Vioxx

We are taking steps which follow the certification of the Vioxx Class Action for Canada. An order was made by Mr. Justice Cullity in February 2010 after the finalization of the dismissal by the Courts of the final appeals from the certification granted by the court.

We reviewed each of our files and letters were sent by mail to all of our clients (except in Quebec and Saskatchewan) advising that of a June 30, 2010 deadline for the receipt of any and all forms opting out of the class action. Most clients responded and we sent opt-out forms to the class action administrator.  Where the person has opted out they are required to proceed with an individual claim in court which would not be limited to the amounts for class action settlement once reached. An individual case would carry with it the risk of what outcome will be reached in their case.  There is also a risk for the person claiming to be responsible for paying Merck’s legal costs in the event their claim is not successful.  Those who stay in the class action will have no responsibility for any legal costs but if and when the class action settles they would be required to accept an amount determined by a formula for compensation in the class action as approved by the Court.

If you chose to stay in the Class Action we will continue to represent you and do the necessary work to see that you receive the maximum entitlement under the circumstances of your case for any future settlement.  The cases we recommended for opting out are ones with more serious heart attack or stroke injuries, work disability and loss of income, significant regular Vioxx use (including use at the time of the event) and fewest other cardiac risk or other negative factors (eg. smoking, family or personal medical history, age, weight).  For those cases there will be close scrutiny by Merck and its lawyers of the strength of the case, so that a claim that may end up paid through the class action may not be strong enough to succeed on an individual basis.  We are preparing court claims for the individual cases and it is not known how far those cases will go individually in the court process before they are resolved. There have been no significant developments to report this summer yet…

For now:

1. Please send us a note by mail, fax or email to confirm all of your current contact information unless you have done so recently and there is no change. Do not put personal information into comments you may wish to make here at our website. The postings are available for anyone to see.

2.  Please send us any prescription records or other documentation of Vioxx use that you have not already sent us.

3.  Please send us any updates as to medical or work disability condition changes from before and any new health issues related or not.

4.  Please send us any Death Certificate, Will, or Estate Probate documentation you have not sent us before if the Vioxx user is deceased. We will need to get instructions from the Estate Executor if there is one. Be aware that family members are bound by the decision of the injured party and can not split claims between the class action and outside of the class action.  Families should begin to discuss this and come to a decision together.

5.  We welcome general questions or comments which will be posted at this website. For ANY specific personal case questions call our office or email: miskinlaw@yahoo.com

WE HAVE BEEN WAITING A LONG TIME FOR THIS STAGE IN THE VIOXX CLASS ACTION CLAIM.  THIS DOES NOT MEAN THERE IS ANY SETTLEMENT BUT WE HAVE MOVED A STEP CLOSER TO RESOLVING CANADIAN VIOXX CLAIMS. THANKS TO THOSE WHO HAVE RETURNED THEIR ELECTION FORMS.

The Centennial Building (Former Whitby Courthouse)

The main area of practice of  Miskin law offices is civil litigation, which is basically law suits involving claims for money.  Murray Miskin  has over 30 years of experience acting for parties claiming in civil cases brought in the Ontario Courts.  Our work is mainly in the Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice in bringing civil claims for money damages.  We do not handle Small Claims Court cases. Litigation is an expensive process and so if you hire us to defend a law suit you will be billed regularly at hourly rates. Law suits of under $10,000 are handled by the Small Claims Court where lawyers are not necessary. In 2010 that increased to $25,000.  In our experience small claims are not economically handled with lawyers involved and we do not generally act in Small Claims Court. Often insurance is available to cover claims that may be brought against you and we will, when consulted, look into that. If you wish to bring a claim we usually bill when we recover money in the claim.  Most of our clients are regular people, without a lot of money, who can not afford the luxury of litigation. Sometimes litigation is a necessity. When it is appropriate we will advise you  to settle and how to keep costs under control during the process. While we are a small community firm, most of our litigation is fought against the largest law firms in Canada and we do not hesitate to take on a difficult claim we believe to be reasonable and just.
CONTINGENCY FEES AND CLASS ACTIONS:
More often than defending law suits we act on behalf of individuals and small business people suing to collect money due to them. Often we can arrange to collect our fee from the proceeds of the law suit when it is complete.  In personal injury cases we normally do not charge a fee until a successful recovery is made on our clients’ behalf.  This means anyone with a good personal injury claim with significant damages can come to us and not be restricted by lack of financial resources.  Sometimes this approach may not be appropriate in risky cases where we do not believe success is assured. Usually we will advise clients not to proceed with high risk claims which may end up costing more than they can achieve. We ask clients to pay the expenses of a law suit we bring on their behalf through retainers from time to time as needed and if they are able to pay.  For large cases involving many people with a claim against one company or individual who has harmed many or the maker of a particular harmful product such as the drugs Vioxx, Bextra, Yaz, Yasmin or Asbestos injury we work exclusively on contingency fee.  These cases involve all risk and expenses being with the lawyer who bears the risk of carrying a speculative case.  For this type of case known as Mass Tort Litigation  we are now charging contingency fees of one third of recovery which we share with other lawyers working with us.  Contingency fees are now legal in Ontario and regulated by the Law Society of Upper Canada. Feel free to arrange a no cost and no obligation appointment to discuss litigation matters before you proceed.  Our first free consultation will be for as much time as necessary to understand and provide an opinion on the case and is not necessarily the usual first half hour as many lawyers offer.  We are frequently consulted by individuals including lawyers for second opinions on law suits which are in progress or to review settlement proposals.
SETTLEMENT OR TRIAL:
Usually it is better to settle on the best terms rather than go through the stress, expense and often years it takes to get a case to trial.  Trial results are uncertain and there is much risk involved especially where there is a jury.  Court rules related to costs and offers make the risk much higher to the point where few cases actually go to trial.  When it appears appropriate we encourage settlement through negotiation or mediation.  When settlement can not be achieved we consider the alternative process of arbitration which is usually cheaper, faster and less uncertain than court. Some cases just can not settle out of court and when that happens, we, unlike some litigation  lawyers, are not afraid to take a case to trial even if it is risky.  Insurers and their lawyers know that we do not back down when claims are denied and usually we can find a reasonable settlement. Our  good reputation is based on years of litigation including considerable trial experience, positive client results, knowledge of the court system and the persistence which does lead us sometimes to trial and to the Ontario Court of Appeal.
Murray H. Miskin
Murray Miskin is widely recognized as a Canadian pioneer in the field of Alternative Dispute Resolution both for mediation and arbitration.  He is recognized by the legal profession nationally through a leadership role in the Canadian Bar Association (CBA), and for his expertise in the fields of Insurance law, Civil Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Murray served for two years as Chair of the CBA’s National Sections Council and was on the CBA Board of Directors and Finance Committee from 2007-2009.  Through his long involvement with the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now called the American Association for Justice or AAJ) Murray is well known among U.S. personal injury lawyers. He interacts regularly with the AAJ leadership and is regularly contacted for advice on Canadian law and referrals from American lawyers. He also belongs to the Inter American Bar Association (IABA) where he also works with lawyers in Central and South America.

Michelle E. Brown

Our Associate lawyer Michelle Brown is a member of AAJ and is active in the AAJ’s minority caucus. Our lawyers belong to, and are both active in the Canadian Bar Association and its provincial branch the Ontario Bar Association, the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, the Durham Region Law Association and the Advocates Society.

Put our experience and network of contacts to work for you.
If you wish to consult us on a litigation matter please call the office to arrange a telephone initial case review and then schedule an appointment for a free first meeting to discuss your case in detail.

In Canada all claimants (outside of Quebec and Saskatchewan) had to decide before June 30, 2010 whether to accept the class action as the basis for their compensation or to opt out and seek compensation based on their individual case. We advised each of our clients and guided them through that decision making process.  Read our article at this website titled: “Attention Vioxx Clients”. If you have a serious Vioxx injury (to yourself or a family member) you need legal advice right away and should have a lawyer to represent you and help you decide what to do.  If you are represented by another law firm you should have checked by now with that law firm about your options and their advice for your claim. If you have done nothing you are part of the Class Action and will have to accept the compensation that it may or may not give you.  If you opted out by the June 30 deadline you may get more compensation depending on your case but you also will face a greater risk.

At some point a business decision will be made by Merck to settle claims outside the US, and Canada may or may not be early on Merck’s settlement agenda.  Merck can not be forced to settle and the road to trial is still a long one. Extreme patience is still required. The following paragraphs set out the history of the Vioxx case for Canadians until now:

Vioxx was a very popular, profitable and highly promoted anti-inflammatory drug manufactured by Merck and rushed to market in 1999 to compete with Pfizer’s similar drug Celebrex. When evidence, originally suppressed by Merck, came out about cardiac dangers the drug was recalled from the market September 30, 2004. At that time our firm sought out individual clients to make claims against Merck. Many of these claims are for fatal incidents where we represent the families of Vioxx users who died after using the drug. Across Canada a number of “class action” claims were issued by lawyers. Most of those lawyers who each act for a “representative plaintiff” are united in a national coalition with the primary court proceedings in Toronto, Ontario. We have worked with the class action lawyers to assist in showing the strength of the claims by Canadians related to Vioxx, but our focus has been on individual clients rather than participating directly in the class action Court proceedings in Canada. Claims were brought for some of our clients in the New Jersey court but those claims were not allowed to continue as a term for settlement of American claims.
Claims against the manufacturer Merck were disputed hotly and there were mixed trial results in the United States before a settlement was reached. Some cases were in the US Federal Court and some were tried in individual state courts. There are a number of unusual situations which were not considered when the American settlement was agreed upon and there is some fine tuning to do before it is completed. This stage is likely to end before settlements in Canada and other countries will be considered by Merck. There has been a settlement this year of an American class action case to reimburse those who paid for Vioxx prescriptions but that does not affect individual injury claims. In the United States injury claims are not dealt with by class action. The Canadian class action in Ontario for people injured by Vioxx use was certified in 2008 but that was delayed by appeal in Ontario and to the Supreme Court of Canada until late 2009. Merck continues efforts to delay the proceedings until they are ready to talk. We expect to be in direct talks with Merck when that time comes. We are hoping this will still happen this year, 2010 and we are continuing our work towards that with our file preparation. With Merck there are a huge number of claims all over the world and the first three years after recall of the drug were ones where Merck denied any responsibility for the effects of Vioxx. This denial remains in effect in Canada but can not logically continue as U.S. cases settle. Recently, in Australia,  Merck lost the first Vioxx trial outside of the United States. We are still looking at pursuing individual settlements for many of our clients with others being part of a class action settlement. We will again be contacting each of our clients when it looks like there will be a Canadian settlement. To date there have been no developments related to possible Canadian settlement and our approaches to the company have been rejected as premature. An appeal of class action certification was finally dismissed.  On October 22 the Supreme Court of Canada put an end to Merck’s attempt to stall the class action due to inter-provincial conflict and confirmed the rejection of a separate Saskatchewan national claim by that province’s appeal court.  The Ontario Divisional Court finally decided to dismiss Merck’s last appeal and deny further leave (permission) to Appeal in a December 7th decision by Madam Justice Denise Bellamy. That decision was not reported in the news and there is still little general knowledge that certification appeals are over.  On February 10, 2010 Mr. Justice Cullity updated the procedural orders related to the certified class action and we now have until June 30 to deliver notices for individual claims opting out of the class action.  This order was formally issued by the Court on March 5, 2010.  Only one newspaper notice was ordered to be given which was in the Globe and Mail newspaper February 27, 2010.  Most people with claims still have no idea that the Class Action is proceeding and that an important decision must be made and filed for individual cases by the end of June 2010.

We are working on our own strategy for settlement and for the procedure for advancing individual claims now that the class action certification is complete.  The lawyers for Merck in Canada appear to have clear instructions to simply continue to focus on delaying the class action proceedings in court for now.  We are proceeding with several cases opted out of the class action and are working on issuing court claims in several provinces. Some of our discussions and our strategy mut be kept confidential as this website is accessible to anyone. You may still contact our firm for representation now if you believe you have a Vioxx injury claim for yourself or a family member. Murray Miskin, July 1,2010

A QUOTE: “We try to remember that medicine is for the patient. We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow, and if we have remembered that, they have never failed to appear. The better we have remembered it, the larger they have been.” George W. Merck II (1935)

Yaz and Yasmin are dangerous

Yasmin® and Yaz® are two similar birth control products that Bayer manufactures, markets, and distributes containing a fourth-generation progestin called drospirenone.  These leading products have been found to have very serious adverse affects and we caution women to study that carefully before beginning use of them.  The products are marketed by Bayer to young women as effective and as having other benefits like helping with mild depression and acne control as well.

Yaz and Yasmin can cause dehydration in the body which causes an increase in the potassium levels (hyperkalemia) and a decrease in the sodium levels (hyponatremia) in the body.  As potassium acts as a key control in cardiac rhythm, this imbalance can cause hyperkalemia arrhythmias, which, in turn can cause blood clots and thrombotic events such as stroke or deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or heart attack. Dehydration is also a risk factor for kidney stones and gallbladder disease.
While other birth control pills can cause thrombotic events, the cause of those effects are from the estrogen side of the equation. The thrombotic effects of Yaz and Yasmin are from the progesterin side. While it has long been accepted that high estrogen levels can cause these adverse events, Yaz/Yasmin/Ocella have been marketed as having low estrogen levels, thereby having a lower risk for thrombotic events. There have been several studies that have called this into question.

Our firm now has clients with serious injuries and we are involved in court class action proceedings related to Yaz and Yasmin. Most of our clients have gall bladder issues but some have blood clots and cardiac problems.  A great number of individual court cases are proceeding in the United States and our firm has been retained in Canada to represent Canadians across the country with problems from these drugs.  We are working to get maximum compensation for each of our clients  with the class action and in separate law suits and  possibly in the US courts.  If you believe that you have suffered harm from Yaz or Yasmin contact Murray Miskin directly by email to miskinlaw@yahoo.com or call Anna at Extension 118 at our office.  We will send you our detailed questionnaire and assess whether you have a case once we have your detailed answers back. If we think you have a case we will represent you on a contingency fee basis so there will be no expense or risk to you.

The human body is easily injured

INSURANCE AND THE LAW: Most people have insurance to protect in the event of unfortunate events. Car insurance is mandatory and is the basis for the many injury claims which  involve  court actions. If you are responsible for an injury to another person your liability coverage will defend you against claims made and pay those claims to the extent of your insurance policy limits when there is a settlement or a court finding of fault. Your insurance company has a duty to you as its insured to provide coverage as set out in insurance policies. Most personal liability is covered under either an auto or a homeowner (or tenant) policy of insurance. If your own property is damaged or destroyed and it is insured  your insurer will investigate the claim and if it is satisfied that the claim is a proper one and coverage exists it is to pay you to the extent of your coverage. The measure of damages and conditions, limits and exclusions are set out in your insurance policy which is a contract. Your insurer has a duty to be fair and reasonable in its dealings with you and handling of your claims. If it fails to do that and denies your claim for reasons which appear improper see a lawyer. If your insurer is treating you in a way you do not understand speak to your insurance broker who may advise you and if you have a serious concern consult with a lawyer. On February 22, 2002 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a case Whiten v. Pilot Insurance upholding a jury award to an insured by the insurer of one million dollars punitive damages on top of actual damages. In that case this Ontario insurance company (owned by Aviva) dealt unfairly with its insured who lived in Bancroft Ontario on a home fire insurance claim. The facts are extreme. This precedent setting case has resulted in insurers being more careful in how they treat their insureds. In similar cases against other insurers large punitive damage awards have been given. Cases where punitive damages are awarded in Canada are still uncommon and they require almost malicious conduct by the insurer. Contact a Plaintiff’s insurance law specialist for advice in situations which you think involve extremely unfair treatment by an insurance company. WE ACT IN A WIDE RANGE OF INJURY CLAIMS. YOU CAN AFFORD US WITH CONTINGENCY FEES. Murray Miskin is known in the legal profession and in the insurance industry for his expertise in Insurance Law. He is a past Chair of the Ontario Bar Association’s Insurance Law Section and the Canadian Bar Association’s National Insurance Law Section. He was Chair of the CBA’s National Sections Council for 2007-2009, a body co-ordinating all areas of legal practice in Canada. As Chair of National Sections, Murray just completed a two year term as a member of the Canadian Bar Association’s Board of Directors and its Finance Committee. As immediate Past Chair of National Sections he remains a member of the National Sections Executive actively involved. Since 1985 he has been the principal trainer of Arbitrators in Ontario and helped bring Mediation to prominence in Ontario as a primary method for resolving personal injury claims.  He served for many years as a Director and Vice President of the ADR Institute of Ontario. He is a prominent and well known lawyer in Canada, locally,  provincially and nationally. In his law practise, Murray Miskin works exclusively for people who have claims against insurance companies rather than for insurance companies defending such claims. If you have an insurance claim you need a lawyer who believes in you and is on your side like Murray Miskin or Michelle Brown of our firm. Michelle Brown is experienced at defending insurance claims from the time before she joined our firm but for the past four years she has been primarily acting for injured people making insurance claims. Michelle’s defence experience and insight into their methods has strengthened us in our skills used for bringing successful insurance claims. Michelle is a passionate advocate for people who is highly respected by defence lawyers and insurers for her skill and preparation. If you have an insurance policy for benefits to be paid in case of loss or injury and the insurer refuses to pay you may get a free first consultation to learn your rights. Do not wait because there are strict time limits for court claims under most policies. If your remedy is through the courts our firm can commence an Ontario court action on your behalf. If the claim needs to be brought in another jurisdiction a local lawyer there can be brought in by us when necessary. Murray Miskin, through twenty five years of active involvement in the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now called the American Association for Justice) has a network of American lawyers and legal research facilities at his call in every U.S. jurisdiction. These are also lawyers who work for people’s rights and justice who will be on your side when brought into the case. This expertise has enabled us to assist Canadian “snowbirds” and others visiting the USA who have accidents or legal issues.  Similarly, Murray Miskin is frequently called upon by U.S. lawyers needing help with Canadian law or legal action that must be brought in Canada. Through the Canadian Bar Association Murray has developed a network of lawyer contacts across Canada and links with American lawyers involved in the American Bar Association. Murray also belongs to the Inter American Bar Association which includes lawyers in both North, Central and South America. TRUST YOUR PERSONAL INJURY ISSUES TO OUR EXPERIENCE. Some injury claims are dealt with by Public organizations such as Criminal Injuries Compensation and Worker’s Compensation. We sometimes handle claims to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board but in many cases we will encourage people to apply on their own due to the limited compensation making it uneconomical to hire a lawyer. The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (W.S.I.B.) used to be known as the Workers’ Compensation Board (W.C.B.). It is a government managed insurance scheme of no-fault benefits for persons injured while in the course of their employment. It is funded by employer premiums but the system has taken away the right to sue employers for compensation. This includes other employers than the injured worker’s own employer. The system is complex and bureaucratic so getting legal advice is a good idea. We often run into cases where there is an overlap between the right to sue and the right to claim compensation. In those cases the injured worker is allowed to “Elect” whether to receive benefits or sue. Always get legal advice before making a decision. Many legal claims against insurers are for personal injury through the negligence of another person or a company. Negligence involves a breach of a duty of care towards others including strangers. Usually such claims, legally called Tort Claims, are defended by insurers representing the person at fault and providing liability coverage to pay the claim. These claims are not against your own insurance but under the liability coverage of another person’s policy. That coverage is there to protect individuals from claims brought by others against them. If you are bringing such a claim remember you are not dealing with your own insurer and be more guarded. The first duty of the other insurer is to their own insured and not to you. For such claims a lawyer is usually necessary. If the other party has no insurance there may still be a remedy through insurance so please investigate with legal advice all serious injuries or other claims you may have. If you are injured in a motor vehicle accident, where you have your own insurer they are required to pay no fault accident benefits which are very important and may in serious injury cases amount to a large sum of money. Where there is very serious or “catastrophic” injury there are large sums of money available for life to a victim regardless of fault for the accident. If you do not have your own insurance these no fault benefits are still available. It is important to retain an experienced lawyer in catastrophic cases to ensure that full benefits are received and in some situations to have a fair settlement that is reasonably invested which could fund services and support for the victim. Put experienced trial lawyers on your side through the Miskin Law Offices. Now most cases are settled through negotiation, mediation or arbitration without court. That is a specialty area of Murray Miskin who is particularly effective because of his known court experience and record of persistence and success. FOR PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS, WHERE IT IS LIKELY YOU WILL SUCCEED, WE DO NOT REQUIRE ANY PAYMENT IN ADVANCE OF SETTLEMENT, FROM OUR CLIENTS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT INJURED AND DISABLED PEOPLE USUALLY CAN NOT AFFORD TO OTHERWISE HIRE A LAWYER. HOME ACCIDENTS AND DOG BITE CLAIMS HOME INSURANCE POLICIES INCLUDE COVERAGE FOR LIABILITY CLAIMS BY PERSONS INJURED ON OR OFF THE OWNERS’ PROPERTIES. THIS INCLUDES A WIDE RANGE OF ACCIDENTS AND INJURIES CAUSED BY PETS OF THE HOMEOWNER. FAMILY MEMBERS RESIDING IN THE HOME MAY NOT MAKE CLAIMS UNDER THIS COVERAGE. Our office has dealt with very serious injuries by guests in homes including stairway falls, swimming pool accidents, and falls from decks. Persons who go to premises uninvited to make deliveries or visit can make claims for injury cause by falls on icy driveways, decks, pools and other incidents. Every kind of dog can cause serious injury by biting. Dog Bites are serious matters which traumatize victims permanently and leave horrible scars. Bites to children are especially upsetting. Some dog bites result in death or permanent disability. Our office has represented many dog bite victims and we never ask for a retainer or fee until such a claim is settled. In Ontario, the Dog Owners Liability Act imposes strict liability on dog owners for injuries caused by dogs with very few exceptions. We handle these cases on a contingency fee basis. Where a child is the victim we act on the basis that all legal fees are paid by the insurer who pays the full claim with no deduction of money paid for the child. Money for the benefit of children is held by the court and earns interest until the child is 18 years old. All settlements for children require court approval including approval of the legal fees paid. If a claim is made against you report it to your broker or insurer and they will handle it on your behalf and appoint and pay for a lawyer if one is needed. It is important to have adequate home insurance coverage even if you are a tenant to protect you from this type of claim. Ask your broker about Umbrella Policies which offer greater combined coverage for both home and auto claims. Our office represents people who make home insurance injury claims on a contingency fee basis. You may bring a claim against a friend or relative on their home insurance policy without harm to the person you are claiming against. Their insurance policy will cover them and unlike auto insurance their premium will not normally go up based on the claim. Hopefully they will understand the need for compensation and remember it is the insurance company who is responsible for defending and paying genuine claims. Auto Accidents: One of the most complex areas of legal practice in Ontario, Canada is now auto accident injury claims. This includes all injuries from accidents involving automobiles including injuries to pedestrians and bicyclers. Due to the “no fault” benefit system people must often look to their own auto insurer for much and sometimes all of their compensation. If they do not have auto insurance they can get these benefits from the insurers of autos involved in the accident. Where there are accident benefits in dispute there is a system of mandatory mediation with independent Government mediators who often help bring about a compromise or other settlement. It is important to have legal representation at mediation and all settlement agreements have a two day “cooling off” period where you may change your mind. If mediation fails to resolve a dispute you can choose to go court and sue or go to a privately paid or Government employed arbitrator. Private arbitration of accident benefit claims is rare because of the low cost and efficient service available through the Financial Services Commission of Ontario. The applicant insured pays only $150 to commence the process while the insurer must pay $3000. In the end a costs award may be made against either party so frivolous arbitration claims are not encouraged. Arbitrators are independent people who usually have experience and expertise in the subject area of the dispute. For accident benefits for accidents after October 31, 1996 that there is an option of private arbitration. The right to sue the at-fault driver or owner and their insurer has not been taken away but has been limited. That limitation which came into effect for accidents from June 22, 1990 was changed on January 1, 1994 and again on November 1, 1996. Further changes and limitations to the right to sue were brought in effective October 1, 2003. To understand your rights under any of the systems you need legal advice from an experienced lawyer whose focus in on this type of work. Your right to sue the at-fault driver in Ontario and accident benefits available to you has changed on the following dates: 1. Accidents before June 22, 1990. 2. Accidents from June 22, 1990 to December 31, 1993. 3. Accidents from January 1, 1994 to October 31, 1996. 4. Accidents since November 1, 1996. 5. Accidents since October 1, 2003… This is a modification by the former Harris/Eves Government from 4. above which defines a tougher threshold and increases the deductible on injury claims for pain and suffering from $15,000 to $30,000 with the intention of preventing most claims from proceeding. Very few injuries are serious enough to both pass the threshold and be greater than the deductible. If general damages for pain and suffering are assessed over $100,000 the deductible does not apply at all. This current system cuts back payment for specific medical treatments, eliminates Designated Assessment Centres and regulates paralegals. No fault benefits pay for lost income (80% of net pay) up to $400 a week and claims can be made against at fault drivers for those with higher income losses. Ontario’s Liberal Government of Dalton McGuinty has responded to pressure from auto insurers to cut back the availability of treatment under no fault benefits for all but the catastrophically injured.  Such a change would harm a great number of people and limit recovery from minor injuries which with proper care would resolve.  On November 2, 2009 it became public that the government has a new policy effective in one year that people can reduce their level of benefit coverage to reduce premiums or if they wish pay more for keeping current coverage levels or getting more coverage. We strongly encourage all Ontario motorists to maintain their current coverage or buy more not less. Unless you agree to an increase of accident benefits medical and rehabilitation coverage the limit will be reduced from the current $100,000 limit to $50,000.  Serious injuries need the higher level of coverage. There are other changes which make it easier for the insurers to administer policies cheaply and deny claims.

If your accident is one where you have the right to sue, or believe you do, there is a time limit for starting your claim in court. It is usually two years from the date of the accident but sometimes is less. It is important to give notice of your claim as early as possible and within four months of the accident if the accident is November 1, 1996 or after. Notice letters are usually sent by lawyers to meet the legal requirements which include disclosure of medical records and other documents once notice is given. Fault for an accident may sometimes be split between drivers and it is important to claim against all of the right people. The person charged by police is not always 100% at fault in a civil claim. If you are a passenger you may bring a claim against the driver even if it is your vehicle of a friend or member of your family driving. Some people are reluctant to being such claims, but should remember it is really the insurance company who responds to (and pays) the claim not their friend of relative. Lawyers meeting with injured drivers and passengers together must be careful to avoid conflict and sometimes can not represent or even meet with both. Where an accident is caused by an unknown, uninsured or underinsured driver there is usually a right to claim from your own or another insurer. Where there is no insurance at all available there is an Ontario Government fund available. That fund may be involved and pay a claim, for example where a pedestrian or bicyclist with no auto insurance is struck by an unknown hit and run driver. Most of us pay for auto insurance which is mandatory in Ontario and its purpose is to protect you from claims by others based on your fault for an accident. Minimum policy liability limits are $200,000.00 but most people carry $1,000,000.00. One million dollars or more liability coverage does not cost much more than the minimum and is highly recommended. You liability coverage will protect you and extend to you as a claimant if the person at fault is uninsured, unknown or underinsured. The insurance is there to provide benefits in the event of damage, bodily injury or death. When we buy insurance we also pay for the right to sue and get paid by an insurer for pain and suffering and other losses. We strongly recommend that you see a lawyer as soon as possible after an accident involving serious injury. The above information relates to auto accidents in Ontario, Canada. The situation becomes even more complex where the accidents take place in, or people involved are from other Provinces or States. We are frequently involved in such cases and would be pleased to consult with you for a free first and sometimes second meeting to determine your rights. Fires and explosions can be fatal or cause very severe injury We have acted in a number of serious burn cases from fires and explosions. These incidents may be due to the negligence of an insured person or company and we would be pleased to meet with you to discuss possible claims. We are familiar with the extreme form of injury which can be caused by fire.If you have an injury or insurance claim call to speak to Anna at (905)430-8880, Ex. 118 or email: murray@adrworks.com.