They’re not really going to bar lawyers from most ICBC cases.
They’re just going to see to it that it doesn’t make a lot of sense to hire one. Debate started late last week on the government legislation designed to get the public auto-insurance company out of its financial jam. Attorney General David Eby did the explaining, which amounted to a lawyer explaining to the world why people won’t need lawyers anymore.
A major part of the cost-saving campaign is to shift damage-claim cases from the court system to a civil-resolution tribunal. That system was set up two years ago to deal with minor matters. Its jurisdiction is being widened to include minor-injury ICBC cases with claims up to $50,000. (A column last week erroneously said minor claims would be limited to $5,500 damage. It’s the pain-and-suffering component that is limited to that amount.)
Eby said the intent is that “people should be able to show up on their own, have a dispute resolved with the active assistance of the tribunal and do it without having to pay legal fees so that the majority of the claim amount goes to the claimant.”
But “if you want to pay a lawyer to come, you can do that here, as well, if you wish.”
Under questioning by B.C. Liberal MLA Michael Lee (also a lawyer), Eby outlined the government’s expectations of how it would work. A claimant involved in a crash who disputes ICBC’s offer would go to the tribunal to settle the dispute.
ICBC’s current thinking, he said, is that one of their adjusters, as opposed to a lawyer, would attend any hearings to explain and defend the corporation’s offer.
Eby said it’s possible that even in claims under $50,000, some complicated legal disputes would arise that would prompt someone to hire a lawyer. But “it doesn’t make a lot of financial sense.”
From the corporation’s point of view, he said, the anticipated size of the differences between ICBC’s offer and the client’s claim would be small enough that paying a lawyer to argue for the corporation wouldn’t be worthwhile.
“The intent is to help get costs down at ICBC and that they wouldn’t be sending lawyers. They don’t want to be spending money on lawyers. That’s why we’re setting this system up … to have them resolved without a bunch of legal expenses on both sides so that the money actually goes to accident victims.”
Retaining counsel wouldn’t add up for clients, either, he said, for the same reasons.
Even if clients do retain lawyers, it doesn’t mean ICBC would automatically lawyer up, as well. Eby said ICBC spends between $120 and $300 an hour on lawyers it has on contract.
“It doesn’t take long to eat up a lot of money appearing with a lawyer instead of just sending the adjuster, who is an expert in claims who can provide the tribunal with the information that they need.”
There’s an exception to that expectation. The tribunal’s initial cases, starting next year, will develop the case law on exactly how the new system works. Those precedents are important, so ICBC might have lawyers working on some cases just to set the ground rules.
Eby, the anti-lawyer lawyer, also took a heretical view on expert witnesses. The bill provides for limits on how many can appear. ICBC spends $25 million a year on expert reports for minor claims, and Eby said two or three experts on each side contradicting each other “doesn’t particularly help the court in determining the value of the claim.”
He said the tribunal could direct the parties to agree on one expert to do the assessment, “and that’s that.”
Just So You Know: B.C.’s trial lawyers are calling the changes a significant attack on legal rights. They’re obviously also anxious about an enormous pool of work vanishing.
But Eby had some reassurances for them.
The tribunal is going to need a lot more members to adjudicate all the new cases, and guess who he expects will be hired?
“It’s not unreasonable to expect that there are going to be a significant number of personal-injury lawyers who are going to be taking these jobs. I think there’s a distinct possibility we’ll see a number of lawyers with personal-injury experience applying for these jobs at the tribunal.”
