The no-fault framework has made it nearly impossible for a struggling victim to find a private lawyer for a real Supreme Court bad-faith lawsuit. Injured British Columbians have had their fundamental legal rights methodically eroded by three specific legislative actions: the 2013 Limitation Act (which slashed the basic limitation window down to two years), the 2019 Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act (which implemented arbitrary minor injury caps and stripped away injury categories), and the total eradication of tort rights via the 2021 Attorney General Statutes (Vehicle Insurance) Amendment Act (the No-Fault System). 

This multi-layered legislative overreach violates Section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867 by stripping away the inherent jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to adjudicate civil damages and transferring that power to a government-controlled tribunal. Furthermore, by completely eliminating contingency-fee legal representation, the framework inflicts a profound adverse effect under Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, leaving injured laypersons with significant functional impairments who are struggling to just get through their day, and economically vulnerable victims without the essential legal advocates required leaving them without the legal help they need to actually fight for the rights they are entitled to, thus removing stripping away their constitutional right to equal protection under Section 15 of the Charter by removing their constitutional right to access to justice under the Rule of Law.

Forcing unrepresented, significantly injured and struggling citizens to battle a multi-billion dollar state monopoly staffed with insurance adjusters and trained lawyers completely strips away true access to justice and violates Section 7 of the Charter by directly affecting and compounding the injuries sustained and life impacts inflicted by reckless drivers. Where the injured's lives are further affected by the cold time constrained, bureaucratic architecture of the no-fault system built on documentation, systemic delays, an unsecure portal system that allows vendors with a claimants claim number to submit unverified generated reports for payment with our insurance premiums without authorization and informed consent or provided for review and ICBC unrightfully legally allowed to use these unverified submissions to assess a claimant's claim and use for the CRT even when flagged errored, misleading and incomplete goes against administrative fairness.

This failure is compounded by BC's medical crisis and lack of patient centered care, public bodies and ICBC vendors use of the wrong forms and gaps in the current built system allowing vulnerable injured to be exploited, injuries misattributed and minimized, stripping vulnerable injured of their autonomy and causing real-life harms.

This system's framework is actively taking away innocent British Columbians' lives and is a constitutional injustice, a public safety and a human rights crisis.

 Recommendations based on my own experiences under this system and first hand recognising where these gaps in the system are that need to be immediately addressed:

• Support Bill M 237: to broaden definitions and remove timeline limits for severely injured victims who face delays in getting lacking systemic patient centered medical care and independent patient centered assessments due to the healthcare crisis and seriously compounded due to the 2021 system where ICBC is affecting our medical care with systemic medical avoidance in being an ICBC claim, bias providers and affecting our medical care and medical records.

• Eliminating ICBC Vendors and Transitioning Billing to MSP: Immediately eliminate ICBC's direct billing and "preferred vendor" system. The current framework creates a systemic bias where contracted providers work for the insurer, systemically minimizing injuries and rather than focusing on patient-centered care.

• Transitioning to a Hybrid Model and MSP Billing: BC needs to adopt a hybrid model much like Ontario’s framework, which preserves the right to sue while handling accident-related medical care directly through the provincial health authority. Moving all injury care billing into the Medical Services Plan (MSP) would ensure that patients—especially those without a family doctor or trusted primary care provider to oversee their care—receive seamless public healthcare without fighting insurance adjusters and being left abandoned without the proper individualized care and injury supports they need to help them get through their day. ICBC’s role should be strictly limited to reimbursing the province on the backend. Additionally, the province should introduce a medical voucher system for low-income British Columbians to protect patient autonomy, allowing vulnerable claimants to choose their own independent practitioners and breaking ICBC’s monopoly control over accident victims' rights and recovery.

• Reinstating Tort Claims for True Life Losses: The current no-fault model fails to reflect true life losses, particularly for British Columbians without standard, traditional employment. By relying on rigid formulas to calculate benefits, the system overlooks the real economic and personal impacts on freelancers, gig workers, stay-at-home parents, students, and the self-employed. It is critical to reinstate tort claims and the right to sue so that accident victims receive fair, individualized compensation based on their actual life realities.

  ICBC’s standardized, cookie-cutter protocols completely fail to reflect a person's unique physical, psychological, and medical recovery needs, stripping away their autonomy to make their own healthcare choices.

• The Human Impact:  Over-Reliance on Medical Records and Loss of Patient Autonomy: The current system relies far too heavily on a rigid trail of medical paperwork, completely ignoring first-hand, real-time reporting from the injured person. ICBC and the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) treat clinical notes as the absolute truth even when factually inaccurate, while completely discounting how functional impairments actually disrupt a person's daily life.

ICBC has taken total control over medical care and recovery supports, stripping away patient autonomy. Instead of listening to independent treatment providers who actually know or are learning about the patient, ICBC relies on its own preferred vendors and internal adjusters to decide what care or daily supports are necessary. This dynamic forces injured people to fight their own insurance company just to get the basic therapies and home supports their actual doctors recommend.

ICBC should have absolutely no authority to direct, limit, or control a patient's medical care or their access to daily recovery supports.

• Banning Blanket Medical Releases (Form CL237A) and Coercive Tactics: Legally prohibit ICBC from using blanket medical release authorizations, specifically the CL237A form. ICBC routinely relies on coercive tactics—threatening to cut off or suspend vital accident benefits—to force vulnerable claimants into signing away their privacy rights. This allows the insurer to launch broad "fishing expeditions" into a patient's lifelong, unrelated medical history just to find excuses to minimize their claim. The Act must be amended to declare that a claimant's refusal to sign a blanket, non-specific disclosure form cannot be used as grounds to alter, reduce, or terminate their injury care or financial supports.

• Repeal Section 28.1 of the Insurance (Vehicle) Act to Stop Covert Claim Minimization: Immediately amend the Act to completely repeal Section 28.1, which forces healthcare practitioners to release a patient's medical reports to ICBC without their consent. This provision is actively being misused behind claimants' backs, allowing ICBC to covertly dig through private medical records to minimize injuries and cut off benefits.

Stripping citizens of their right to medical privacy to serve an insurer's bottom line violates the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA). Patients must have absolute sovereignty over their health data, and ICBC must be legally barred from accessing medical histories without explicit, informed patient consent. The law must be stripped of the clause that allows doctors and clinics to bypass patient consent [28.1]. The Act must be amended to state: "No medical report, electronic file, or clinical note may be transmitted to, or relied upon by, the corporation without the express, dated, and signed verification of the claimant."

• An immediate lock on the ICBC portal. It is not secure. The portal lacks the security and verification from claimants where any ICBC vendor with a person's claim number can without their knowledge or consent generate and submit a fraudulent report for payment affecting their supports and claim outcome without the claimant even ever knowing anything was submitted.- Completely violates Section 7 of the Charter (Security of the Person).

• Amend Portal Accountability Laws: The provincial government must legally mandate that ICBC's electronic claim portal architecture complies strictly with PIPA. The law must forbid the portal from automatically accepting any file using only a claim number. It must require a multi-factor authorization step that originates from the patient before any clinical upload is unlocked.
  In critical cases where an accident victim is in the hospital, unconscious, or on life support and unable to provide consent, the law must mandate that a legally designated Power of Attorney (POA) or legal guardian be established. Independent lawyers must be involved to thoroughly review all medical and insurance documents before any portal submission is legally allowed. Moving to a hybrid model will ultimately eliminate this vulnerability by restoring immediate access to legal advocates at the scene of the injury.

There must be a mandatory, strict-liability fine of $10,000 per unauthorized document upload without absolute verification and review by the claimant and corrections before ICBC payment verified at both ends, levied against both the non-compliant vendor and ICBC for violating this law. Currently, non-patient centered vendors and ICBC are actively weaponizing this unsecure system to push unverified, factually errored, misleading and incomplete records through for financial gain while simultaneously aiding the insurer their bottom line.

Under the current rules, ICBC is allowed to use these corrupted documents to push to sign the CL237A blanket medical release 'they don't have enough information', use to assess a claim to determine and deny supports, treatments and fight the claimant for the incorrect injury category at the CRT, despite it being administratively and procedurally wrong, because the corporation knows it can use the poisoned file with impunity and simply sue the vendor privately later if they get caught.

To stop this weaponization, 75% of this fine must be paid directly to the affected claimant as statutory damages for the systemic privacy violation, with the remaining 25% directed to the OIPC Enforcement Fund toward independent investigators. This forces ICBC to become an active gatekeeper because they can no longer profit from unverified documentation.

Crucially, this statutory privacy fine must be legally isolated and separate from common-law bad faith. Paying this administrative penalty does not absolve, shield, or immunize any vendor or ICBC from further civil litigation. Claimants retain their full, separate rights to pursue Supreme Court lawsuits against these entities for fraud, medical malpractice, negligence, and intentional bad-faith practices. This ensures entities cannot use the payment of an automated fine as an administrative excuse to bury ongoing bad-faith behavior.

• Establish an Automatic Exclusion Rule for the CRT: The Civil Resolution Tribunal Act must be amended to include a strict evidentiary filter. The law must state that any record flagged by a claimant as an unverified draft, misleading, or incomplete must be automatically excluded from the tribunal record until an independent pre-hearing review determines its accuracy. 

• Immediately Repealing Limitation Barriers Retroactive to May 2021: An immediate amendment to the Act to repeal the restrictive limitation of only 2 years for Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) and civil claims, restoring standards from before the 2013 Limitation Act back to 6 years. This protection should have been reinstated the moment independent legal support was stripped away in 2021. Currently, ICBC and its preferred vendors exploit this framework by systematically withholding records until the 2-year limitation period times out, stripping injured people of their right to an accurate claim history. A strict two-year statute is entirely insufficient for individuals struggling daily with severe functional impairments.

• Abolish ICBC's paid Comprehensive Medical Assessments. - These do not do anything but waste our insurance premiums. We need to bring back true patient centered medical provider care. - We have lost this under this system pre-no-fault.

• Eliminating Staff Bonuses and Reducing ICBC Executive Pay: The high salaries and performance bonuses for ICBC staff must be eliminated to remove the financial bias that leads adjusters to minimize claims for the corporate bottom line. Public insurance premiums should not fund staff who cause unnecessary stress and anxiety for injured people. Adjuster compensation should be restructured and capped to reflect basic administrative duties, saving premium dollars and ensuring staff focus on helping claimants rather than protecting corporate profits.

• Abolishing the ICBC Fairness Officer and Redirecting Funds: The position of the ICBC Fairness Officer should be entirely eliminated. The public funding used to maintain this ineffective internal role would be far better spent expanding resources for independent, external oversight. These funds should be redirected to hire more investigators for the BC Ombudsperson and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) to ensure genuine, unbiased protection for British Columbians.

• Mandatory Independent Audits of ICBC Complaints and the Fairness Officer since May 2021: A mandatory, fully independent audit of all complaints submitted to ICBC managers, the ICBC Fair Practices Department, and the Fairness Officer since the 2021 no-fault system took effect. Currently, these internal oversight bodies are misleading the public by minimizing serious grievances. They routinely classify deep systemic issues as simple "disputes over services."
  The audit must look past ICBC's arbitrary closure codes and examine the true core of what claimants are reporting. This includes documenting systemic adjustor misconduct, hidden portal security breaches, and severe Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) violations. ICBC cannot be allowed to internally audit itself or shield its corporate overreach by mischaracterizing legitimate patient privacy and regulatory complaints.

• Overturn ICBC’s invasive Health Care Services Terms imposed on community clinics. Under the guise of direct-billing audits: These terms grant ICBC the authority to access onsite computers, compromising the privacy data of all patients. This heavy-handed corporate overreach interferes with private medical businesses and severely violates patient confidentiality under PIPA. ICBC's authority must be strictly limited to processing claims, and they need to be legally barred from accessing clinic hardware or non-accident files.

• Mandatory Government Oversight and Strict Regulation of Multi-Disciplinary Clinics: The province must implement independent government oversight to license and regulate multi-disciplinary clinics handling motor vehicle and workplace injury claims. Clinics should face severe penalties, including being barred from handling insurance cases, if they engage in misleading reporting or administrative misconduct.

The Act must be amended to establish the following strict standards for clinic intake and electronic portal reporting:

• Prohibit Staff-Authored Intake Forms: Legally bar clinic staff or practitioners from filling out medical history checklists on behalf of a patient. A claimant’s intake records must only reflect their own handwriting, selections, and first-hand input.

• Mandatory Verification Prior to Submission: Clinics must be legally prohibited from scanning or uploading any document into an insurance portal that is marked as an "Unsigned Draft," left completely undated, or is incomplete. No record can be relied upon by an insurer until the claimant has fully reviewed, dated, and signed a finalized copy confirming its absolute accuracy.

• Ban Overbroad, Biased Questionnaires: Outlaw structurally flawed, overbroad clinic questionnaires that improperly merge long-past, stable, or fully managed conditions with new acute, accident-related injuries. Intake logic must focus strictly on the current acute trauma, immediate safety concerns, and the claimant’s active, pre-accident functional baseline.

• Prevent clinic staff from falsely checking off generic boxes claiming that treatments are "beneficial" when a patient has explicitly reported that therapies are intensifying symptoms, worsening mechanical impairments, or fall completely out of the provider's scope of care when a patient needs specialized imaging and care.

• All treatment plans must be worked with the claimant and is not something a treatment provider can descried on their own, and should not be forced upon by ICBC by threatening to cut of other beneficial treatment or Accident Supports.

• Banning Cookie-Cutter Protocols and Protecting Patient Autonomy: The Act must be amended to legally bar ICBC from forcing accident victims into standardized, "cookie-cutter" treatment protocols. Medical care is not one-size-fits-all; a therapy that helps one individual can severely intensify injuries, pain, or mechanical impairments for another. All recovery programs must be designed collaboratively with the claimant, rather than decided unilaterally by a provider or an adjuster. Furthermore, ICBC must be explicitly prohibited from using coercive tactics—such as threatening to cut off or suspend other beneficial treatments or daily accident supports—to force a claimant into undergoing protocols that are ineffective or outside their medical needs

• Banning Record Fees and Stopping Coerced Rights Waivers: The Act must be amended to legally bar ICBC billing vendors and clinics from charging high fees to injured claimants who request copies of their own medical files. Currently, when claimants cannot afford these high fees, clinics exploit the situation by pressuring them to sign away their statutory rights—coercing the claimant to let ICBC pay for the records directly.

• Amend the Act to establish a publicly funded, independent patient advocate or legal navigator program. This would ensure that British Columbians without family doctors or private legal representation have an independent ally to help them secure the medical care they are entitled to and help in navigating and help with submitting complaints to PQCO and Governing Bodies, and reviews for OIPC and Ombudsman. - There is currently no-help in the system with anything ICBC related. This allows ICBC to immediately implement and rely upon unverified, uncorrected files containing errors, severely damaging the active claim before the patient ever sees it and making future corrections incredibly difficult. The law must mandate that all claimants receive their complete files instantly at zero cost, and the 2-year limitation clock must be automatically paused during any active record dispute or correction request.

To Address Systemic Privacy Violations

• Immediately Creating a Fast-Track OIPC and Ombudsman Stream Immediately create a fast-track OIPC and Ombudsman stream to address withheld records, high access fees, corrections, and accuracy reviews for individuals whose active claims are being directly affected. The law must explicitly forbid the OIPC from artificially breaking down a single complaint against one entity into multiple subcategories. - Currently, if a claimant brings a file against a single clinic regarding needing to access their records to review for accuracy and needing factual corrections, but they are being withheld with high fees, the OIPC splits these interconnected issues of one clinic into individual subsections and counts them as separate submissions. This administrative practice prematurely  maxes out the OIPC's 3-submission maximum, an unfair administrational intake process that exhausts and locks out vulnerable, injured citizens from accessing their privacy rights and access to justice under FIPPA and PIPA before their file is ever reviewed, leaving these errors to affect their medical records and care, their claim and supports and using up their strict limited statutory of limitation timeline.

• Establishing a Cohesive Cross-Jurisdictional OIPC Investigative Stream: The government must hire and train specialized OIPC investigators and grant the OIPC more power, specifically for complex PIPA and FIPPA submissions. The system must address cases cohesively where complex privacy violations cross-overlap, which makes it incredibly difficult for an injured layperson to split into separate reviews. This includes situations where multiple public bodies and/or private entities—such as an Emergency Room (FIPPA), an ICBC vendor clinic (PIPA), or even two separate PIPA clinics—are withholding or misrepresenting the exact same records needed to review false, misleading, or incomplete information needing factual corrections and accuracy affecting an injured person's claim. A specialized OIPC investigator must have the authority to address these connected violations simultaneously, evaluating the entire poisoned record trail as a single case while issuing separate, binding OIPC rulings to each entity.

• The "Complete Records Rule": The law must be changed to state that when a citizen asks for their records, the package they receive must automatically include all communications relating to your record and identity by the entity to and with any outside third party and a complete tracking log showing exactly who they shared your medical or claim info with to ensure where it's further affecting your records.

• Mandating Electronic Audit Trails and Verification of Complete Disclosure: To ensure the OIPC enforces a proper electronic audit trails to ensure that a person receives their entire, full record if the government body or organization in cherry picking disclosures the OIPC can audit and fine for entitles withholding these these third party communications under a person's name. Claimants must be protected from having to launch an additional, delayed OIPC review for withheld or incomplete records when simply trying to access their own file. The law must mandate that public bodies and private clinics provide a certified, full digital audit trail with every access request, verifying that no communication or file access log has been hidden, deleted, or withheld. 

• The Simplified Law Proposal: If an entity hands a citizen a records package and leaves out these third-party communication logs, the Privacy Commissioner can instantly fine them. This would also put funds back into the OIPC. No more lengthy court trials, and no more hiding behind the excuse of it was just a "careless administrative error."

• Mandatory Fines for Refusal to Correct Factual Errors: There must be a mandatory, strict-liability fine of $5,000 levied against any healthcare provider, clinic, or public body that ignores proper reporting, disregards, refuses, or slow-walks a claimant’s legal request to correct factual errors, omissions, incomplete documentation, and misrepresentations in their medical files. Furthermore, an entity must face an immediate, escalated fine of $15,000 to $25,000 for sharing flagged misinformation with a third party, such as a third-party insurer, or for failing to explicitly inform that third party that the records are currently under active dispute and correction

When a clinic leaves corrupted data on a file after being explicitly flagged with proof of the correct diagnosis, they are actively participating in claim minimization and insurance fraud [28.1]. Just like the portal security breaches, 75% of this fine must be paid directly to the affected claimant as statutory damages for the ongoing harm to their medical care and claim, and 25% directed to the OIPC Enforcement Fund toward independent investigators. Entities must face immediate financial consequences for weaponizing falsified medical records to run out an injured victim’s statutory limitation timeline.

Crucially, this statutory correction fine must be legally isolated and entirely separate from common-law bad faith. Paying this administrative penalty does not absolve, shield, or immunize any vendor, public body, or ICBC from further civil litigation. Claimants retain their full, separate rights to pursue Supreme Court lawsuits against these entities for fraud, medical malpractice, negligence, and intentional bad-faith practices. This ensures entities cannot use the payment of an automated correction fine as an administrative excuse to bury ongoing bad-faith behavior.

The True Human Cost of BC's No-Fault Enhanced Care Financial Savings

While ICBC claims to have saved billions of dollars since implementing the 2021 no-fault system, these savings are built entirely off the backs of real people. The corporate drive to save money is causing profound, long-term harm to accident victims, severely derailing their physical and psychological recovery. By stripping injured individuals of their legal rights and healthcare autonomy, this system creates overwhelming distress, destroys quality of life, and is ultimately taking people's lives. No financial balance sheet can justify a system that actively works against the health and survival of the citizens it was meant to protect.

We currently hold 2,854 signatures
End ICBC No-Fault Insurance System - Protect the People, Not the Insurer

SAGE🌿