The BC Conservatives want to repeal no-fault and bring back the right to sue, with private competition “on the table.” That pitch went out in a Sept 29 letter from Lorne Doerkson to trial lawyers and insurance executives — leaked, not announced.
Much of the case for it rests on private being cheaper. So let’s check.
ALBERTA
Average full-coverage premium there: $1,991/year.
ICBC’s average for basic + optional: $1,358.
Ontario, also private: $2,164.
Competition was supposed to push prices down. Instead insurers started leaving Alberta, and the province doubled its cap on annual increases just to slow things down.
And on January 1, 2027, Alberta scraps its lawsuit-based system for “Care-First” — which looks a lot like ours. Their stated reason: litigation costs.
So the province everyone points to is more expensive than us AND moving toward our model.
WHAT WE HAD BEFORE 2021
$1B+ per year in legal costs
25–33% of settlements going to lawyers
3–5+ years to resolve a claim
Lawsuits impossible in 40% of cases
Lifetime care capped at $300,000
It also rewarded the wrong things. When your payout depends on how injured you can prove you were, the incentive is more treatment, more expert reports, more time off. Most people were genuinely hurt. But we all paid for the fight in our premiums.
WHAT CHANGED
Saved roughly $1.5 billion. Rates dropped 15%, average saving $490 (28%) in year one, and 95 cents of every claims dollar now goes to the injured person, not the process. Care starts immediately regardless of fault, no lifetime cap, and wage loss covers 90% of your net income instead of the old $300/week.
Rates haven’t risen since 2017, while the rest of Canada’s went up over 45%.
And here’s the part that surprised us. There’s a sizeable body of research finding that people in adversarial, fault-based systems recover worse than people with comparable injuries in no-fault systems. Not because anyone’s faking — because spending two years proving how hurt you are, to someone whose job is to argue you aren’t, is itself bad for you. When Saskatchewan moved to no-fault in 1995, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine found whiplash claims dropped and recovery times improved. Later systematic reviews have found the same association between claims, legal representation and poorer recovery, across multiple countries.
WHERE IT GENUINELY ISN’T WORKING
Catastrophic injuries. The permanent impairment payout tops out near $313,918, wage loss is capped at a $122,500 income, there’s nothing for pain and suffering, and “catastrophic” is defined so narrowly that a single amputation doesn’t qualify.
Of 175 submissions to the legislative review, 144 came from individuals — many injured, most saying the system is impossible to navigate alone.
That review was dissolved on day two of hearings when the election was called.
THE PARTIES
NDP — keep it, fix it internally; no rate increase for three years.
GREENS — keep no-fault, amend the law so all reasonable accident costs are covered.
CONSERVATIVES — hybrid with the right to sue restored, private competition, caps on lawyer fees. Doerkson also says he’s made “no promises.”
OUR TAKE
Everyone agrees catastrophic injuries are handled badly. The question is whether you fix that by raising the ceilings, or by putting lawyers back in the middle of every claim.
Note who got the pitch and when: the groups standing to earn the most from reopening litigation heard about it three weeks before voters did.
And Disability Alliance BC — representing the people this system fails worst — gave the review five recommendations. Number one was KEEP NO-FAULT. They want an advocate for claimants and a wider definition of catastrophic injury. Not a return to court.
Fix the ceiling. Don’t burn down the building.
Receipts: ICBC, Alberta’s Automobile Insurance Rate Board, the Alberta Care-First announcement, the leaked Doerkson letter (CBC, Times Colonist), the BC Green platform, and submissions to the Special Committee reviewing the Insurance (Vehicle) Act. Cassidy et al., New England Journal of Medicine (2000), plus later systematic reviews on compensation and recovery.