This injury claim first denied based on minor vehicle damage has been overturned by the Court of Appeal. The conclusion that minor car damage means no injury has therefore been debunked by our highest court.

In a car accident, just because there is minor car damage does not mean there is no injury. Also, common sense does not dictate that the smaller the impact, the greater probability of no injury. As a result, the Court of Appeal makes clear:

[30]  This is not to say that the severity of impact cannot be a relevant factor in assessing evidence of injury, but it is one factor, which must be grounded in evidence, not speculation. In my view, the judge’s assumption, unsupported by evidence, was an error in principle that permeated his approach to the evidence and his assessment of the appellant’s overall credibility.( G-B v. ICBC, 2019 BCCA 137 )

In Boag v. Berna, 2003 BCSC 779, ( see Kallstrom v. Yip, 2016 BCSC 829 para 330) Judge Williamson noted:

[12]      …I am aware that it is often inappropriate to equate the damages to a motor vehicle to injuries that may be sustained by occupants of that vehicle.  That a piece of steel is not dented does not mean that the human occupant is not injured

Injury claims involving minor vehicle damage are often minimized by the insurance adjuster and customer recovery specialists. Speak with a lawyer to help avoid your serious injury being labeled as minor.

Big Changes to ICBC Injury Claims

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment