Another Bad AC RE Retro Application Of Post-Feb. ’14 rule

Author(s): Deanna S. Gilbert

August 9, 2017

A couple of months ago, I reported on the FSCO decision of MVACF v. Barnes. This was a concerning appeal decision, wherein the Director’s Delegate concluded that irrespective of when the crash occurred, any attendant care provided after the February 2014 amendment to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) is subject to that amendment. The amendment changed the old “in for a dime, in for a dollar rule” to restrict the amount payable under the attendant care benefit for service provided by non-professionals to the actual economic loss suffered by that service provider (subject to the maximum of the Form 1 and policy limits).

By way of update, Barnes is being appealed. The date for the judicial review has yet to be scheduled.

In the interim, however, a further decision has come out and which is, again, unhelpful to injured accident victims. In the matter of Cowdrey v. MVACF, released on May 1, 2017, Barnes was followed. The judicial review of Barnes has now become all the more important so as to ensure that non-professional attendant care providers are being fairly compensated for their services.

For more information, please contact, personal injury lawyer Deanna Gilbert at 416-868-3205 or by EMAIL.

Related Resources for Attendant Care Benefits:

Attendant Care Benefits: The Importance of Documenting Economic Loss

Share this

Related articles:

Stay Informed

Subscribe to receive updates on the latest news from Thomson Rogers as well as invitations to seminars, webinars and more.

Sign up now