Opinion: Alberta's Care-first gives too much power to insurance firms

I am an accident reconstruction engineer that has been reconstructing accidents since 1999. Many Albertans are unaware of the government’s proposed auto insurance changes that are coming Jan. 1, 2027.

Also, many Albertans are not aware that Alberta already has direct compensation for property damage (DCPD) that was introduced on Jan. 1, 2022. Under DCPD, insurers simply repair their own insured vehicle, regardless of who was at fault for the accident. However, at present, drivers in Alberta can still sue for compensation for injuries.

In about a year, Alberta is planning to implement a Care-first auto insurance model, where private insurance companies will be responsible for taking care of their own insured client’s injuries, regardless of fault. This no-fault system means that drivers can no longer sue an at-fault driver’s insurance company unless that driver is convicted of a criminal or serious traffic offence.

What if the at-fault driver dies in the collision? Also, the proposed legislation doesn’t allow the at-fault insurance company to be sued, but rather the actual driver, putting the convicted driver’s assets at substantial risk. Does a business owner now have to carry additional insurance to cover themselves in case they are criminally convicted (e.g. farmer, small business owner, doctor, et cetera)?

The government suggests that insurance companies will still determine fault for the collision, such that at-fault drivers will pay higher insurance premiums, likely via a simple “fault chart.” What if a driver is travelling 1.5 to two times the speed limit, should that high-speed driver not bear some responsibility, for a collision, even if the injured driver pulls out from a stop sign?

If insurance companies simply determine fault internally, there is a financial incentive for the insurance companies to find both drivers partially at fault, as then premiums increase for both drivers.

There is a current feeling that plaintiff lawyers have too much power and that fraudulent insurance claims are too frequent. However, the government’s Care-first plan simply hands the perceived power from plaintiff lawyers over to insurance companies, thereby eliminating any type of balance or consequence.

With the proposed Care-first no-fault model, dealing with injuries will now be left solely up to insurance adjusters. How does an injured person dispute an insurance adjuster’s opinion, without being able to hire a lawyer to advocate for himself or herself?

Large insurance companies already own auto body shops and restoration companies, and will likely own medical firms like physiotherapy clinics. The problem is that there will be less accountability. An Alberta insurance tribunal will likely be overwhelmed by complaints against insurance companies.

I understand the desire to control insurance premiums. If the concern is insurance injury fraud and too much power for plaintiff lawyers, then I’d propose a no-fault system for minor collisions, but a tort system for more major collisions. I propose that a minor collision would be if no air bags deployed in a passenger vehicle. If an air bag deployed in any involved passenger vehicle, then it would be deemed a major collision, such that tort law would apply.

Other crashes in which tort law should apply include heavy vehicles (semi-trucks, buses), two-wheeled vehicles (motorcycles, bicycles, scooters), and pedestrian accidents. I understand that differentiating crashes in this way would not be perfect, but it would allow any layperson to know what crash would be no-fault (not tort) and which would be fault (tort).

In this way, essentially all minor rear-end collisions, sideswipes, and parking lot incidents would be no-fault, such that those involved individuals are cared for in a Care-first model, and would not be allowed to sue anyone. This would eliminate a substantial amount of alleged fraudulent injury claims.

However, for higher-speed crashes where the likelihood of life-altering injuries is much higher, individuals would be able to hire a lawyer to help them advocate for compensation for these injuries. Let your MLA know how you feel about the proposed legislation.

Don Pohl is a mechanical engineer with over 26 years of experience investigating all aspects of motor vehicle collisions in Alberta. He’s worked for insurance companies, plaintiff lawyers, police, and criminal defence lawyers.

Letters welcome

We invite you to write letters to the editor. A maximum of 150 words is preferred. Letters must carry a first and last name, or two initials and a last name, and include an address and daytime telephone number. All letters are subject to editing. We don’t publish letters addressed to others or sent to other publications. Email: letters@edmontonjournal.com

Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the news you need to know — add EdmontonJournal.com and EdmontonSun.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.

You can also support our journalism by becoming a digital subscriber. Subscribers gain unlimited access to The Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites. Support us by subscribing today: The Edmonton Journal |The Edmonton Sun.