AB - Auto Reform Flashcards
Identify the goals of Alberta auto insurance reform (7).
- private sector delivery model
- claims handling: effective and efficient
- medical benefits: make sure they are appropriate
- income replacement: easier access
- reduce costs
- stabilize rates: should be affordable for all Albertans
- sustainability: the needs of insureds, “traffic-injured” persons, and insurance providers need to be met
Briefly describe the findings of the Alberta auto insurance committee. (5)
- high premium were caused by increasing BI (bodily injury) costs (specifically non-pecuniary awards for pain and suffering due to the tort system)
- no mechanisms existed to control these BI costs
- injury compensation was often either too high or too low
- health outcomes are worse under tort system (and hybrid tort/no-fault systems)
- health outcomes improved when tort systems were eliminated and replaced with full no-fault models
Name 2 provinces that have pure no-fault systems.
Manitoba and Quebec.
Identify the recommendations of the Alberta auto insurance committee. (2)
- replace existing hybrid tort/no-fault model with a pure no-fault model
- introduce a “continuum of care model” to promote appropriate medical evaluation, assessment and treatment
Why might a pure no-fault system be cheaper and deliver more effective medical treatment.
Benefits can be delivered without having to prove who is at fault:
- less money tied up in legal system (lawyer fees)
- quicker access to medical care
Describe how Alberta’s new auto insurance is recommended to work.
Create a Traffic Injury Regulator, including a Board and Tribunal to oversee the 4 arms of accident care and compensation:
1) claims administration and support
2) medical experts to evaluate injuries
3) claims assessment panels for income replacement
4) a reconstituted version of AIRB (Automobile Insurance Rate Board)
How might the ‘4 arms’ of Alberta’s Traffic Injury Regulator be funded?
- mainly by Alberta auto insurers in proportion to their market share
- a smaller contribution by the Alberta government (from savings generated by the new system)
Assess the likelihood of a successful legal challenge if Alberta’s auto reforms are implemented.
A legal challenge would probably not be successful for the following reasons:
- Manitoba and Quebec already have a pure no-fault system
- such systems have been judged to be within the scope of provincial legislative authority
- a challenge under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms has no merit because all drivers are treated equally
- Morrow v Zhang upheld the minor injury cap, so a future Charter challenge would likely not succeed either
Identify regulatory reforms being considered for Alberta auto insurance. (2)
- switch from ‘prior approval’ to ‘file and use’
- make winter tires mandatory from October to March
Identify problems that Alberta and Ontario auto insurance have in common. (2)
- rising costs of auto insurance (largely driven by BI (bodily injury) costs)
- inefficient delivery of medical care
What has been identified as the primary cause of the problems in AB and ON auto insurance?
Both systems have a tort component which causes:
- delays in medical care
- diversion of resources to the legal system
Identify a similarity in recommendations to address these problems in AB and ON auto insurance.
Provide a greater focus on timely medical care.
Identify a difference in recommendations to address these problems in AB and ON auto insurance.
- AB: convert to a pure no-fault system
- ON: keep hybrid tort/no-fault system, but fix structural flaws by appointing an arms-length regulator with powers to enact policies and procedures)
