Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Cappy

UCB is correct, in my experience (i have friends in insurance defence too).

Not all insurance companies will lawyer up right away. They may way until a SOC is filed or when a Defence is requested.

Most insurance companies now do have in-house lawyers that deal with PI defence, but the majority are still dealt with by external counsel.

I shouldn't have spoken in absolutes, of course. But the SOC usually comes fromj a plaintiff's lawyer right away anyway, without a demand. In my firm's experience (and we do a ton of defence work - though I don't myself) the in house lawyer is just an overseer, and not even usually in contact directly with OS counsel.

Maybe on a $90K claim (which is small) they'd avoid a lawyer.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...388582?cmp=rss


It's a good thing they took the time to do a long exhaustive search to find the best person for the job, with decades of experience managing large pension funds.


No surprise at this point, just more appointments of old dog Conservatives looking to take more control of everything because they obviously know best, because reasons.

Well it depends what you are thinking of when you say they know best.

Danielle Smith wants power and her supporters want (more) money. They don't care about you unless you are somehow contributing to that.

They do nothing for the best interests of those of us who live in Alberta. They are totally focused on doing what's best for themselves and their friends. Alberta citizens are just one more resource to exploit in their own best interests.

It is so obvious, I can't understand why people continue to vote for them.

[Amethyst]

And he's not getting paid?! If he's not getting a salary, he's getting some other benefit. This sounds more sketchy by the moment. Quit electing a government that wants to steal your money!!

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

And he's not getting paid?! If he's not getting a salary, he's getting some other benefit. This sounds more sketchy by the moment. Quit electing a government that wants to steal your money!!

Pro bono makes him ‘clean’ from charges of cronyism and able to make ‘independent’ statements, all of which makes him more credible for the task at hand. And makes it extremely unlikely he stays long term, just long enough for whatever they have planned, e.g. APP

[Fuzz]

The guy who originally came up with the APP plan is now in charge of Aimco and is doing it for free. It's a good thing she promised before the election no one was touching our pensions, so this pretty obviously has nothing to do with taking over our CPP, right? Right? Oh ya, she's a lying piece of ####, so enjoy your turd sandwich.

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Pro bono makes him ‘clean’ from charges of cronyism and able to make ‘independent’ statements, all of which makes him more credible for the task at hand. And makes it extremely unlikely he stays long term, just long enough for whatever they have planned, e.g. APP

Exactly. If he's not getting paid, he's getting something else out of it

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Your claim was that no fault would reduce the number of judges we pay for. They are overloaded, yes. This won't help much. And it won't save money because the same number of judges will exist.

But actually, it won't help "much". So it will help. And it won't save money because we're not going to deal with the supply crunch, but if we were to match supply to demand then it would. Economists understand that firing judges and reducing the need to hire more judges are both a reduction of tax spending on judge salaries from what they would otherwise be. If it instead reduces queues then it's an equivalent gain, but in the long run supply will have to exceed demand or the queue will become infinite.

Fookin' lawyers. You're picking at things that don't actually matter. The spirit of what I said was correct. Which you probably know, but you're more concerned with being right than being fair. This is why nobody likes you.

[InglewoodFan]

I think Harper being appointed to board chair is sketchy AF, but the pro bono thing isn't a huge thing. Per last year's annual report, the chair would get $50k retainer + meeting fees and travel. There was a board member that retired at the end of 2023 who had his whole fee donated to the United Way. My impression is that for any big organization, board memberships aren't the way to get rich because you are already well off.

Maybe I am being idealistic, but how much sway does the board have vs the C-suite? Are the results acceptable and you are staying out of trouble? Good, carry on.

I can't copy and paste from the AIMCo Mandate and Roles document but it is interesting reading on what the qualifications are for the board and that they retain a search firm that has an "evergreen" list of potential directors to replace existing directors. Wonder what is taking so long?

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by Cappy

(1) i am a lawyer
(2) i was retained

Why would an insurance company pay my client more money just because they retained a lawyer. They are billion dollar companies whose job it is to limit payouts.

You are making too many assumptions to get to your "inflated claim thesis"

I made the caveat in my post that I assumed you weren't a lawyer and read it as you just sent a letter misrepresenting yourself as one. I apologize, thanks for clearing that up. Also i'm an idiot and for some reason PI read in my head as Private Investigator that day which didn't make sense.

I understand what you are saying about settlements, if they got 100k then its worth 100k, sure. When you see a settlement for 50-100k in an accident where vehicle damage is minimal in vehicles that are safer than they have ever been before you don't start to question the system? Its not sustainable in Alberta with rate caps and the "Take All Comers" rule https://tinyurl.com/5awa2xwv I keep seeing people say they don't want no-fault insurance because they don't want to pay for the bad drivers but that is what is happening now, I mean its always the case that your premiums pay for everyone but right now good drivers are punished with higher rates to pay for the capped bad drivers.

For now we wait and see until this is finalized and announced.

[brocoli]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Byelection called for Lethbrdge West. December 18th

https://www.elections.ab.ca/writ-has...t-by-election/

This was the expectation. Lethbridge West has a large student population which will most have gone home for Christmas at that point further lowering the turnout. Here's hoping that all of us that are here go vote

[Muta]

Originally Posted by brocoli

This was the expectation. Lethbridge West has a large student population which will most have gone home for Christmas at that point further lowering the turnout. Here's hoping that all of us that are here go vote

I do hope people get out there and vote. What a scummy thing for the UCP to do; it's well within their jurisdiction to do so, but it reeks of desperation. Right before Christmas? #### right off with that crap. Classic scumbag UCP.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Are we gonna get some Marlaina Bucks at some point? That'd be sick. Still think back fondly on the hard partying my friends and I did when those Ralph Bucks hit.

Looks like Trudeaullars are on their way in the spring: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...tmas-1.7389206

Smith won't want to be shown up, so she'll make sure to give everyone in Alberta a new pony. It's like divorced parents trying to win their childrens' love just to spite each other.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by getbak

Looks like Trudeaullars are on their way in the spring: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...tmas-1.7389206

Smith won't want to be shown up, so she'll make sure to give everyone in Alberta a new pony. It's like divorced parents trying to win their childrens' love just to spite each other.

No way a baller like Sliver makes less than $150,000

The Liberal government will also send $250 to the 18.7 million people in Canada who worked in 2023 and earned $150,000 or less.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

No way a baller like Sliver makes less than $150,000

Oh right, I forgot it will just be for us little people.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by getbak

Oh right, I forgot it will just be for us little people.

Speak for yourself

[getbak]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Speak for yourself

I was. I meant "us" as in "me and people like me" not as "me and you". I assume you're in the same tax bracket as Sliver and Trudeau.

[Geraldsh]

If you worked in 2023 = screw the seniors/retirees ?

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

I made the caveat in my post that I assumed you weren't a lawyer and read it as you just sent a letter misrepresenting yourself as one. I apologize, thanks for clearing that up. Also i'm an idiot and for some reason PI read in my head as Private Investigator that day which didn't make sense.

I understand what you are saying about settlements, if they got 100k then its worth 100k, sure. When you see a settlement for 50-100k in an accident where vehicle damage is minimal in vehicles that are safer than they have ever been before you don't start to question the system? Its not sustainable in Alberta with rate caps and the "Take All Comers" rule https://tinyurl.com/5awa2xwv I keep seeing people say they don't want no-fault insurance because they don't want to pay for the bad drivers but that is what is happening now, I mean its always the case that your premiums pay for everyone but right now good drivers are punished with higher rates to pay for the capped bad drivers.

For now we wait and see until this is finalized and announced.

No offence taken, Raek.

With respect to the second point, i understand what you are saying; and for the most part, minor accidents result in minor payments. But, vehicles nowadays are larger, heavier, and cheaper builds with more expensive repairs (crumple zones etc) There are also more drivers than ever before (i assume).

There is also awareness. There are reasons PI lawyers advertise so much. Apart from the obvious answer of market share and gaining clients, some people don't consider calling a lawyer in these circumstances. They jump on offers as it's money in the bank.

When my wife was younger, she was in a minor fender bender and took a 5k payout from insurance; however, she ended up having consistent back and neck pain for a couple years after and likely would've received quadruple that (or more) if she went to a lawyer (pre-cap). So there is also rising awareness out there as well. More people making claims.

This is not to say the system is perfect. I know of people who abuse the system, they know what to say to doctors, what to do to get more cash. I know people who have had half a dozen MVAs trying to make claims. Insurance Defence is sorely needed for these reasons. Also, PI law is essentially as close you can get to printing money as a lawyer.

There has been little done to actually make drivers better and reduce accidents. If you look at places like Germany, driving is treated more like a privilege. You have to take classes, and courses, licenses and fees are pricey, and it all can be taken from you if you #### up.

In Canada, you basically only lose your license if you get caught driving drunk. Even then, you can make an economic argument to keep your license. Licenses are cheap, no requirements outside a 60 min driver test, and little incentive to drive well. But we also lack alternatives to car culture, so driving here is more a right than a privilege.

With all that said, I am in favour of a move to a public no-fault system even though i have family and friends involved in the PI side. If the government looks after the system, and keeps their greedy hands out of the insurance payments, it will likely be beneficial. But i am very much aware that if I am injured in an accident, my rights will suffer.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by getbak

Looks like Trudeaullars are on their way in the spring: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...tmas-1.7389206

Smith won't want to be shown up, so she'll make sure to give everyone in Alberta a new pony. It's like divorced parents trying to win their childrens' love just to spite each other.

It's more likely she'll opt Alberta out of the money.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

No way a baller like Sliver makes less than $150,000

Lip balm is serious business