Blog
Menu
Blog

Personal Injury News

ICBC Adjuster Testifies In Car Accident Injury Case- Injury Claimant Wins 75/25 Liability Split


This injury claim arises from a Vancouver car accident (Tang v. Rodgers,2011 BCSC 123) which occurred near the intersection of 33rd Avenue and Commercial Drive .  The only issue the court had to decide was who was at fault for the car accident.
The injury claimant was driving westbound on 33rd Avenue intending to turn right into the driveway of his residence.  33rd Avenue, at the location where the accident occurred, has one travel lane going each direction. The other driver was attempting to pass the claimant on the right. 
The other driver argued that the claimant was entirely to blame for the accident.  He said that the claimant slowed down, signalled left and moved left in the travel lane and suddenly turned right, colliding with his vehicle.
A witness to the accident  conceded that he was upset with the claimant at the scene.  He said that it was possible that he raised his voice at the claimant and  spoke with someone at ICBC and told them that they should “yank” the claimant’s license.    
Another witness was asked if she made a statement to ICBC.  She did not remember doing so, but acknowledged her signature on the written statement when put to her.  She said that she would have read the statement before signing it. 
In cross-examination, the other driver  acknowledged the statement that he had given to ICBC.  He said that he “sort of reviewed it” at the time.  He did not review it thoroughly before signing it. 
A  bodily injury adjuster at ICBC  testified at the trial.  She took a statement from the other driver. As the judge stated, ”  She said that her practice is to first ask people to describe the events of the accident.  She then takes a statement from them and walks them through it line by line.  She makes the individuals read it and then makes any changes to it before they sign.  She has no recollection of the statement that she took from Mr. Rodgers and Ms. McLean, but she signed the statement and there is no reason for her to think that she did not follow her usual practice.”
The court found that the other driver 75% at fault and the claimant 25% at fault. Posted by Mr. Renn A. Holness

Tags:

Leave a Reply

"Renn A. Holness is a gifted lawyer and author to over 1000 legal blog articles. Married father of two daughters, son of a neurosurgeon and founder of Holness Law Group."

read more

Schedule a Call

Contact Us





*lawyer confidentiality assured