04 Aug ICBC Refuses To Pay For Injured Man’s Counselling

The case of Latreille v. Downey, 2020 BCSC 976, involved a Plaintiff who was in two separate motor vehicle accidents.  The Plaintiff claimed to have chronic pain, sleep disturbance, fatigue and mood disorder, which left him permanently disabled and unable to work.

ICBC accepted the Plaintiff suffered soft tissue injuries in the accidents but not that the Plaintiff was unable to work due to psychological issues. ICBC submitted the Plaintiff’s obesity and resulting sleep apnea were actually the cause of his psychological issues.

At trial the Plaintiff sought reimbursement for counselling services he had received post-accident, relating to the psychiatric symptoms of fatigue, reactive mood and difficulty concentrating.  ICBC refused to pay for the counselling because they did not think it was related to the accidents.

At the time of the first accident the Plaintiff was functioning reasonably well. He was employed, volunteering as an auxiliary constable with the RCMP and able to participate in recreational and social activities.  The Plaintiff suffered low mood, withdrawal and fatigue after the accidents and he was less functional than he had been before the first accident. The Plaintiff’s long-term prognosis was poor given his age and psychological condition. The judge was satisfied that there was a substantial connection between the Plaintiff’s mental health and the injuries suffered in the accidents.

ICBC submitted that if an award for counselling was made, it should be reduced to reflect the risk that the Plaintiff’s obesity, de-conditioning and poor health choices would have led to sleep difficulties contributing to his psychiatric state in any event. ICBC also submitted that his previous cancer caused fatigue and low mood, which contributed to his present fatigue and low mood, and would have done so absent the accident.

The test for awarding special damages is that of reasonableness. The Plaintiff claimed for various treatments and medications totaling $15,177.68, submitting they were prescribed or recommended by medical professionals and hence were reasonably incurred. ICBC submitted that $4,440.00 of that should not be recoverable as it related to the counselling for psychiatric symptoms which they did not think were related to the accidents.

The judge disagreed with ICBC. He found the psychiatric symptoms were causally related to the accidents and were therefore recoverable. He held that an award of the full amount of $15,177.68 for the treatments and medications was appropriate.