The end of no fault insurance

Status
Not open for further replies.

TREMEK

Legacy Member
The Quebec government will introduce a bill this fall that would allow road-collision victims to sue drivers found criminally responsible for the crash, says Justice Minister Marc Bellemare.

In an interview with all-news station LCN on Tuesday, the Liberal minister said the bill would strip convicted motorists of their right to compensation under the provincial no-fault insurance plan.

"Is it normal for the state to use public funds to reimburse a person who is hurt while committing a criminal road offence?" asked Bellemare, who has said the "unjust" no-fault system drove him to join the Liberals.

"This is not acceptable, in my opinion," added Bellemare, a Quebec City lawyer.

Under Quebec law, all parties in road collisions can file an insurance claim with the provincial auto insurance board.

The Liberals, who took power last month, have said motorists would be discouraged from drinking and driving on Quebec roads if perpetrators were forced to pay.

Bellemare, who has represented families of people injured or killed on the roads, said the legislative changes would not be studied by a committee before they're tabled in the legislature.

He explained that the Parti Quebecois government, which lost the April 14 election, has held three rounds of public consultations on the issue since 1996.

Bellemare didn't appear sympathetic when asked whether his proposals would drown some road offenders in legal fees.

"We have choices to make," said Bellemare.

"Right now it's the victims of criminal acts who are the poor ones."

"These victims are partially compensated by the public regime, which doesn't take into account everything they went through."
 
I think its a good idea. but they have to set a limit of what you can sure for lets say 7000$. IF not it will be like the states you can sure for 1mill.
 
J'appellerais pas ca la fin du "No fault" comme le titre du thread le mentionne ; ca ferait juste rajouter l'exception à la règle si tu es victime d'un acte criminel, ce qui est logique.

PARTOUT, que ce soit au travail, au stade, en ville, etc, tu peux poursuivre qqn au civil si tu es victime d'un acte criminel... Mais pas sur les routes. C'est un total illogisme...

Si la personne au volant est reconnu coupable d'acte criminel, ca laisse place aux victimes la poursuite au civil pour dédommagement $$$... PArfait ca..
 
This is a bad idea.... You'll start to see small fender/bender's that result in minor scratches on vehicles turn into whiplash law suits and stupidities that the innocent have to pay for. Very bad idea in my opinion...
 
Originally posted by Greco
This is a bad idea.... You'll start to see small fender/bender's that result in minor scratches on vehicles turn into whiplash law suits and stupidities that the innocent have to pay for. Very bad idea in my opinion...
you dont understand here

its for victims of criminal acts, not a little fender bender you'll be able to sue the other driver, it's in case the other was drunk driving or any other criminal acts

it will still be no fault, but not anymore for the criminals that kill or destroy life cause drinking and driving
 
Originally posted by Greco
This is a bad idea.... You'll start to see small fender/bender's that result in minor scratches on vehicles turn into whiplash law suits and stupidities that the innocent have to pay for. Very bad idea in my opinion...

These are not CRIMINAL offenses. This is talking about things like drunk driving, hit and run..... the regular accidents like you are talkign about would still be in the no fault condition.
 
i see a moreal dilema here, people may definitly want to take advantage of this bylaw by misusing it to thier fullest potential! We may end up like our americain cousins' they sue for a living
 
Everyone here is missing a VERY BIG POINT!!
under the current system if you are hit by a drunk driver you are compensated.
Under the new system you would have to get a lawyer and sue.Now if the guy who hits you is broke or on disability etc etc etc. you will get nothing.Well.... no sorry... you will tecnically get an I.O.U from someone who is broke.
This is not the Goverment "caring" or trying to make people "responsible". It is a money saving tactic.
Will they lower our taxes or insurance premiums.....i doubt it.
 
TROY brings a valid point.
the PQ went on record saying that most criminal offenders are insolvable; meaning that you will never get to see a penny.

Second: Government will NOT lower your premiums. Why should they? Our roads need the money.

Everyone's personal car insurance will rise regardless since insurers' actuarial stats will state that we are ALL greater risks. Insurance will pay out for these things...

It's tough to jump to conclusions...
 
imo, you drink and drive, you deserve to DIE if you injure and/or kill innocent people....

I'm sorry, but there is NO FAKIN EXCUSE for it!!

Did I say DIE? I meant GET RIPPED APPART, stiched back together, and then BURNT!

fffffffffffffff......... must stop venting.... must stop being angry...
 
So I take it you never had just 1 beer at your relatives house then got in your car and went home???

If so, don't come back at me and say that's not the same, you still drank and then drove. Live by your words, don't be a hipocrite...
 
They way it should work is that you should have 100% of your insurance through a private insurance company.

As they charge arccording to your driving record, experience, car you drive, and age, there suddenly becomes a reason to drive carefully.

Good drivers pay less, and poor drivers pay more. There comes a point when your record is so bad that no insurance company will insure you. *poof* imagine that after a generation or two, the affect that would have on drivers...
 
That's a great idea. I think they should extend this to non-criminal offences also in the states. Most of us have deductibles that are $250 that we have to pay if an accident isn't our fault. But what if the deductible is $1000 or $1500. If some moron drives into you, you should be totally free to sue them and recover the deductible if it's their fault. They should have a law like that....
 
Originally posted by volv8


Second: Government will NOT lower your premiums. Why should they? Our roads need the money.

That money doesn't go to roads in Quebec - it goes to insurance. THat's why it's 4 times higher than in Ontario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top