Multiple Vehicle Accident Caused by 90 Year Old Driver: Mr. Van Sprang is a man in his 30’s with a young family and was a key person in his dad’s business which was a heating and cooling service company.  Mr. Van Sprang’s father had plans to hand over the business to his son when he reached his retirement age.  The work was physical and also required ingenuity and problem solving skills.  Mr. Van Sprang was the “muscle” of the company, doing the heavier tasks and the more physical tasks such as working within tight crawl spaces and attics.  Unfortunately, Mr. Van Sprang was involved in an accident whereby the defendant Mr. Tweed, failed to yield as he entered onto the Trans-Canada Highway at an intersection.  His actions forced a commercial truck driver to move over in his lane which in turn caused Mr. Van Sprang’s vehicle to spin out of control and end up on its roof at the shoulder of the road.  Mr. Van Sprang suffered soft tissue injuries which limited his ability to be as productive as he used to be, and also limited his ability to continue on in his role with the company.  ICBC denied liability for this accident, even though it seemed obvious that the actions of Mr. Tweed set in motion this serious accident.  This matter went to trial for eight days.  During that time ICBC strenuously argued that Mr. Van Sprang was at fault for the accident as he must have been driving too fast for the road conditions, and that it had nothing to do with the Defendant failing to yield.

The trial judge rejected this theory, and instead found that Mr. Tweed was indeed at fault for the accident.  The trial judge awarded close to $270,000.00 to Mr. Van Sprang.  This award reasonably assessed his damages for pain and suffering and loss of earning capacity.  It also vastly exceeded any attempts by ICBC to resolve the matter.  The trial was conducted by James Cotter and Allyson Edwards.

PDF: Van_Sprang_v._Tweed_-_Reasons_for_Judgement.PDF

Three Motor Vehicle Accidents Contribute to Chronic Pain: Susan A-C was referred to Nixon Wenger by a friend.  James represented her initially for an accident that occurred in 2012.  While representing her, Susan was unfortunately involved in two other accidents, none of which were her fault.  Susan suffered chronic soft tissue injuries which affected her ability to move and function without pain and to suffer from intense migraines.  ICBC defended the claim of Susan for all three accidents.  They defended a claim in part on the basis that Susan’s claim of pain, migraines and disability far exceeded the injuries she could have suffered in any of these accidents, as none of the accidents were of such a nature as to cause such injury.  In other words, ICBC was saying that the accidents were of such a minimal nature that no one could be so disabled from any of the accidents.  Susan was unable to return to her job as a Walmart employee.  She had difficulty maintaining her home as she did prior to the accidents, and had a difficult time cooking and looking after her children.  James Cotter and Ryan Irving took this matter to a two-week trial in October of 2019.  They retained the foremost chronic pain specialist in British Columbia to assess Susan and to provide expert opinion evidence.  In addition, an occupational therapist was retained, an economist, and a doctor of physical and medicine rehabilitation.  ICBC retained its own experts.  This was a hotly contested trial with many arguments relating to evidentiary issues and expert evidence issues.  However, at the end of the day the trial judge agreed with our position that the culmination of these accidents resulted in significant disability for Susan.  She was awarded over $700,000.00 in damages.  This was a far greater sum than ICBC had ever offered her in the seven years since her first accident in 2012.  Susan was very pleased with the outcome and felt that it justly reflected her loss.

Michael Yawney QC was retained by a professional woman in her early 40’s after she suffered injuries in an October 9, 2013 motor vehicle collision where she was hit hard from behind when she was stopped at a crosswalk to allow a pedestrian to cross the road.  The defendant driver had failed to slow down and stop, despite the cross walk.  There was extensive damage to the defendant vehicle but very little visible damage to the plaintiff’s vehicle.  The woman believed that should would bounce back and be okay, and worked hard with rehab to get back to work. Unfortunately, after multiple attempts to get back to work and to get better, she was diagnosed with permanent chronic pain and disability. Despite this she kept working as much as she could as she supported herself and her daughter.  ICBC took the position that the woman could not have been injured significantly and refused to resolve her claim on a fair basis despite having to admit liability as it was a rear end collision caused by the defendant. Despite numerous attempts by the plaintiff to resolve the claim fairly, ICBC forced the matter to trial. The first trial date did  not proceed because there was no court time available.

Michael Yawney QC, along with partner Allyson Edwards and associate Allison Jaquish, took the matter to trial in January of 2018. Before doing so, further attempts were made to try and resolve the claim fairly; all of which ICBC ignored. Judgement was rendered on March 18, 2019 for over $804,000.00 plus costs. Because of the attempts of Mr. Yawney and his team prior to trial to fairly resolve the claim, the plaintiff was awarded double costs due to the conduct of ICBC in refusing to accept reasonable offers before both scheduled trial dates. To further compound matters, ICBC refused to resolve costs and further court time had to be taken up to decide that issue.

This case is another example of where ICBC, despite its usual blaming of insureds and claimants for high costs, created well over $500,000.00 in extra costs compared to what it could have resolved the claim for prior to trial. This is on one claim! This happens all the time with ICBC claims, but they never tell us that when talking about ICBC’s financial performance. It is always the claimants, lawyers and judges that get blamed for it’s poor performance and high claims costs.   This case is one of many over the last several years where ICBC’s claims management and business practices results in millions of dollars of needless extra cost simply because of the way it chooses to do business. Private insurers always factor in costs and cost savings when adjusting claims; ICBC doesn’t seem to care because it can always go to the government to bail it out and make changes so it doesn’t have to take responsibility for it’s poor business practices. This is the real problem with auto insurance in British Columbia and why over 80% of British Columbians want auto insurance privatized and ICBC sold off. The $500,000.00 wasted on this one claim would go a long way to saving many people from paying higher insurance premiums. We should all be asking that ICBC disclose similar instances when it complains about high claims costs!
PDF Costs Assessment – March 18, 2019 judgment date – before Master R.W. McDiamid (02108776xB91A7) PDF Reasons for Judgment – July 31, 2018 (01810288xB91A7)

Michael Yawney QC was asked to assist a young man and his family as a result of an electrocution injury that occurred on rented property. The young man was seriously injured when a faulty electrical circuit that was not installed in accordance with electrical code requirements, resulted in his being electrocuted.  The financial impact on the family was devastating as the young man was unable to work due to his injuries.  Mr. Yawney and his team helped the family by arranging financial assistance and medical assessment of the injuries, and most importantly, was able to expedite the claim through the courts to help minimize the financial impact. The claim was resolved a few weeks before a lengthy trial for close to $2,000,000.00 plus costs.