BC's no-fault insurance fails life-altering injury victims — a warning for Alberta

CALGARY — A BC MLA is hoping to change what a "catastrophic injury" means under their no-fault car insurance system, Enhanced Care, since injured victims of at-fault crashes are not getting the compensation they need.This is an issue Alberta might encounter under its' own no-fault model, Care-First, set to begin in January 2027 — which, according to personal injury lawyer at Rodin Law Firm, Dana Neilson, speaks to no-fault's inability to properly compensate life-altering injuries for victims. Sheldon Clare, MLA for Prince George-North Cariboo, BC, first proposed the Insurance (Vehicle) Amendment Act in late February.The bill plans to do two things: extend the time period an individual can make a claim for their catastrophic injury and reduce the number of amputations required for an injury to qualify as a "catastrophic injury.".Alberta Care-First Auto Insurance claims $366 savings per vehicle under new system .Under BC's current threshold, the loss of two limbs has to be met to qualify for a catastrophic injury.A catastrophic injury gets you roughly $250K–$300K upfront plus ongoing care benefits (potentially millions over time). Clare wants to expand the definition of catastrophic injury because the definition itself is arbitrary — it is determined through checkboxes instead of by how the injury actually affects the victim's life.This is echoed by Neilson, who stated to the Western Standard this is the underlying issue with the compensation model given to enhanced care victims. "Two people with the same medical injury can experience vastly different consequences depending on their occupation, age, family responsibilities, mental health, or pre‑existing conditions — yet the Care‑first system largely ignores these factors," Neilson said. .New York’s no-fault insurance fraud problem: A warning for Alberta’s Care-First system.Neilson addresses Alberta's Care-First system, which would have the same arbitrary evaluation criteria for "serious" and "catastrophic" injuries as BC's Enhanced Care.Clare testifies he's talked with constituents who have the same issue. “I met with one of my constituents … She was in a motorcycle accident, this wasn't her fault and she lost her leg at the hip,” Clare told the Prince George Citizen News. “This has been a terrible strain on her and it's caused other complications for her. The settlement proposal given is really quite inadequate for the suffering and the life-changing effects of this injury."Clare came to the realization the definition of "catastrophic" under Enhanced Care was quite lacking.."Looking at the act, it occurred to me that this was very hard on people who had suffered a significant injury like this," stated Clare"When we looked at jurisdictions across Canada to see what they were doing and we found that Ontario's definition was one that fit with a single limb being lost, we thought, well, 'why is BC requiring there to be two to make it catastrophic?'""I mean, if someone loses a limb, that's a big deal. You can't just gloss this over as if it were nothing.”"Someone who loses a single limb, even if that amputation permanently ends their career, independence, or quality of life, may be classified as having a 'serious' but not 'catastrophic' injury and therefore receive significantly fewer benefits," stated Neilson..Neilson says this is a warning for Alberta, "From a lawyer’s standpoint, this approach treats injured people as interchangeable units rather than as human beings.""It forces profoundly personal losses — mobility, dignity, livelihood, and independence — into blunt categories designed primarily for cost containment rather than justice."Neilson says retaining the court system for no-fault accidents would allow injuries to be addressed in context — how they affect one's ability to work and one's wellbeing."Expanding the definition of catastrophic injury may help some people, but it does not correct the underlying issue," explained Neilson.."As long as benefits hinge on narrow, predefined labels, there will always be people with devastating, life‑altering injuries who fall through the cracks.""Alberta’s system will categorize injuries in the same manner with pre-set designations which fail to reflect the actual losses and impact to the individual," Neilson warns.

BC's no-fault insurance fails life-altering injury victims — a warning for Alberta

Related Stories

UCP MLA confirms support for binding Alberta independence referendum

PRINGLE: Alberta independence exposes the church’s crisis of courage

Alberta announces new Airdrie health centre with urgent care, birthing and surgery services

911 failed across Ontario overnight as Bell probes next-gen network fault