The recent case of Sweeney v. Yu  https://canlii.ca/t/jk4m6 is an example of the absurd lengths ICBC will go to.  Ms. Sweeney was riding her bicycle when a left-turning car cut in front of her.  She was wearing a helmet.  She was thrown to the ground and struck her helmet on the pavement, cracking it.  At trial Justice Matthew Kirchner found that she suffered a brain injury.  He relied significantly on the evidence of the cracked helmet to make this decision.

But the ICBC defence lawyer had another theory: it was her braids that broke the helmet, not hitting her head on the pavement.  He argued that Ms. Sweeney should receive $20,000 to $30,000 total.  His arguments would have been on instructions from ICBC.  This particular lawyer has worked for ICBC for 30+ years. He knows what they like.

Justice Kirchner gave his views pretty sharply: [170] Counsel for the defendant maintains Ms. Sweeney has not proven the cracks in the helmet were caused by the accident. He argues the cracks could have come from anywhere and suggests they likely developed from the force of Ms. Sweeney pulling the helmet over the thick braided hair she had at and before the accident. I do not accept this theory and, in fact, I find the suggestion that the integrity a bicycle helmet – a basic and critical piece of safety equipment – could not withstand a woman’s thick braided hair to be absurd.

 Justice Matthew ordered that Ms. Sweeney receive $658,000 for her injuries, plus court costs.

 A kinder, gentler ICBC: Two ICBC defence lawyers, plus a student all spent 21 days – at full hourly rates – arguing against every part of Ms. Sweeney’s case.  That’s 63 days of lawyers’ fees. Plus all the “preparation” they will have billed for. You have to wonder what that cost. Your premiums paid for it.

Read the judgment to see how ICBC and its lawyers treated this lady.

 A big shout out to Steve Gibson, Giuseppe Battista, and Brandon Souza (of Murphy Battista: https://www.murphybattista.com/ , who took on Ms. Sweeny’s case after another lawyer dumped her just before trial. 

 ICBC has taken away your right to sue for automobile injuries.  Premier Horgan and Attorney General Eby claim that ICBC will give you “enhanced care”.  They promise that with “enhanced care” you won’t need to sue. ICBC will take care of you. That’s like calling torture “enhanced interrogation”.  Sounds nice, but it’s really viciousness in secret.  Under “enhanced care” when ICBC makes absurd decisions, there will be no justice – no lawyer, no trial, no Judge – to hold them accountable. 

Maybe “enhanced care” means: They’ll smile the whole time. The look on your face may not be so happy…