ID
2024-011
ID
2024-011
Type
Politique
Secteur
Secteur de l'assurance automobile
État
Période de commentaires du public terminée
Date
27 septembre 2024
Date de remise des commentaires
29 novembre 2024
Nous vous remercions de nous faire part de vos commentaires sur la réforme de l’assurance automobile proposé par l’ARSF.
La demande de soumissions est maintenant fermée.
Nous apprécions les commentaires et les questions reçus à ce jour. Vos commentaires nous aideront à orienter notre cadre; restez au fait de notre salle de presse. Suivez-nous sur LinkedIn et inscrivez-vous à notre liste de diffusion pour obtenir des mises à jour rapides.
L’Autorité ontarienne de réglementation des services financiers (l’ARSF) procède à un examen des directives et des cadres à l’égard des fournisseurs de services de santé. Cet examen contribuera à rendre le système d’assurance automobile moderne et efficace tout en veillant à ce que les consommateurs blessés dans des accidents d’automobile continuent à recevoir les soins nécessaires. Dans le cadre de cet examen, l’ARSF mène actuellement des consultations sur trois documents qui présentent des options, qui relèvent des pouvoirs conférés par la loi à L’ARSF, en vue de soutenir la réforme de l’assurance automobile du gouvernement.
Ces documents de consultation comprennent :
- L’examen du cadre de travail pour les fournisseurs de services de santé (FSS) et l’examen du système des demandes de règlement pour soins de santé liés à l’assurance automobile (DRSSAA) qui énoncent des options administratives et économiques permettant de moderniser le système et de rehausser son efficacité.
- L’examen des lignes directrices relatives à l’Annexe sur les indemnités d’accident légales (AIAL) qui présente des options relatives à la Directive concernant les services professionnels, à la Directive révisée du tarif horaire pour les soins auxiliaires et à la Ligne directrice sur les blessures légères.
La consultation est en cours et prendra fin le 29 novembre 2024. Les commentaires des parties prenantes permettront d’éclairer les conclusions de l’examen de la réforme de l’assurance automobile de l’ARSF et les recommandations formulées au gouvernement.
Pour en savoir plus :
- Examen du cadre des fournisseurs de services de santé (FSS)
- Examen des lignes directrices relatives à l’Annexe sur les indemnités d’accident légales (AIAL)
- Examen du système de demandes de règlement pour soins de santé liés à l’assurance automobile (DRSSAA)
L’ARSF continue de travailler au nom de l’ensemble des intervenants, y compris les consommateurs, pour garantir la sécurité financière, l’équité et le choix de toutes et tous.
Pour en savoir plus : www.fsrao.ca.
Avant de commencer, nous vous demandons de ne pas inclure de renseignements personnels ou de renseignements financiers dans vos messages. Si vous devez nous faire part de ce genre de renseignements pour obtenir une réponse à votre question, appelez-nous au 1 800 668-0128 ou envoyez-nous un courriel à [email protected] pour obtenir des instructions.
En soumettant un contenu, vous acceptez que votre document soit publié sur notre portail de participation et utilisé dans des rapports ou d’autres documents préparés par l’Autorité de réglementation des services financiers (ARSF) et qui pourraient rendus publics. Nous avons modéré le contenu pour nous assurer que toutes les publications sont respectueuses et professionnelles. La Loi sur l’accès à l’information et la protection de la vie privée, L.R.O. 1990, chap. F.31, s’applique à tout contenu publié en ligne.
Use left and right arrows to navigate between tabs.
| Secteur | Commentaire | Date postée Trier par ordre croissant |
|---|---|---|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] melanie flitt - Concept Physio
I believe PSG rates should be indexed (option A) based on the CPI. PSG fees should be reviewed every other year. I believed that the current PSG fee schedule is affecting consumers access to care as clinics are less likely to work with auto insurance clients with compensation well below what they are charging clients privately or through EHB. I have had difficulty referring clients to other clinics for this reason. I believe that PT and OT should be paid at the same rate as SLP providers. Why are SLP receiving almost 12% more for services when these allied health providers hold Masters degrees? |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Kim Teggelove - Aspirerehab.ca
The fees chedule should be updated to reflect the current costs of care, ensuring that highly qualified providers are interested in working within the auto insurance sector. Access to skilled and qualified care is especially critical for individuals living with complex brain injuries (who often sustained their injuries in motor vehicle collisions), as their recovery often requires specialized expertise and comprehensive support. Ensuring providers are fairly compensated will attract more qualified providers to the field, allowing consumers to get the high level of care necessary to regain independence and improve their quality of life. Establishing a mechanism to periodically review and adjust fees will help ensure that the system keeps pace with inflation and evolving care needs. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Bobi Tychynski Shimoda - S.L. Hunter Speechworks
Hi there,I am writing to offer my commentary on the lack of increases in the fee schedule for allied health providers. Our Professional Association (OSLA/CASLPA) sets fee guidelines and the current FSCO SLP rate is nearly $100/hour less than our fee guideline allows for. Companies are barely able to survive in this climate and we are seeing many experienced practicianers leaving the field for more sustainable income streams. If this continues, this will compromise client care as the more experienced and skilled clinicians will have reduced motivation to work in this environment, based on the high costs of living, particularly in Ontario. Thanks -Bobi |
|
[2024-011] Kayla Colling
As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, Professional Services Guideline, HCAI System, and Minor Injury Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue. First, specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. The Professional Service Guideline Fee Guideline is no longer compatible with market rates for professional services, causing many to leave the industry. Moreover, Regulated Professionals such as Social Workers and Psychotherapists are not currently listed, resulting in reduced rates for services at the insurer’s discretion. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Second, the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) cap should be increased to $15,000 and indexed to inflation. This would ensure that individuals receive adequate funding for necessary treatments, ultimately reducing reliance on the public healthcare system. The $65,000.00 cap for non-catastrophically impaired clients does not suffice for serious injuries. Oftentimes this funding is exhausted within a year and there is a 1-year gap before an application can be submitted for catastrophic determination. The catastrophic determination cap should return to $2,000,000.00 as prior to 2016, again, the current amount of funding does not suffice to rehabilitate and support individuals with catastrophic injuries. Third, the HCAI system must be modernized. Key features like autofill, real-time error checking, and automation for recurring claims would help minimize mistakes and expedite submissions. A built-in messaging system would facilitate direct communication between providers and insurers, and real-time feedback tools—similar to those used by TELUS Health—could resolve issues quickly. Additionally, there should be a system to provide clear adjudication feedback, improving transparency and reducing delays. Thank you for taking the time to consider this feedback. I am hopeful that these important updates will be implemented, ensuring better outcomes for both professionals and those we serve. |
||
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Laura Paulin - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing the concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Vino Xavier - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing the concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Stacey Bergman - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing the concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Lucy Lee - Cohen Highley LLP
I am a lawyer who works regularly with SABS providers. The professional guideline should reflect market rates of service providers. The idea of SABS was to place an injured person in a position to recover as quickly as possible. In light of the complications of HCAI, we lost many psychologists. Social workers have stepped into the gap. However, due to their unregulated status and the insurers complete control over the amount they will pay, insured individuals are going without emotional and psychological treatment. This lack of treatment can result in chronic conditions developing, adjustment disorder, depression etc. We are losing experienced social workers because they are being paid, at time, half of the market rate set out by their college. The other medical professionals have not had a raise in 10 years. They should also receive an increase. The cap for non-mig, non-cat should also be raised accordingly.I am happy to discuss. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Ramann Gill - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing the concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Pooja Joshi - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing the concerns and comments that I have.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Lindsay Gaspar - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing the concerns and comments that I have.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Maike McCaskell - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Lisa Martin - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Karen Forse - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Arvinder Gaya - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Amaresh Parikshya - Personal Injury Occupational Therapy
Please see my letter attached detailing concerns and comments that I have as an occupational therapist.Thank you for your consideration. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Sandra Weaver - Innovative OT
As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, Professional Services Guideline, HCAI System, and Minor Injury Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue. First, specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. The Professional Service Guideline Fee Guideline is no longer compatible with market rates for professional services, causing many to leave the industry. Moreover, Regulated Professionals such as Social Workers and Psychotherapists are not currently listed, resulting in reduced rates for services at the insurer’s discretion. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Second, the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) cap should be increased to $15,000 and indexed to inflation. This would ensure that individuals receive adequate funding for necessary treatments, ultimately reducing reliance on the public healthcare system. The $65,000.00 cap for non-catastrophically impaired clients does not suffice for serious injuries. Oftentimes this funding is exhausted within a year and there is a 1-year gap before an application can be submitted for catastrophic determination. The catastrophic determination cap should return to $2,000,000.00 as prior to 2016, again, the current amount of funding does not suffice to rehabilitate and support individuals with catastrophic injuries. Third, the HCAI system must be modernized. Key features like autofill, real-time error checking, and automation for recurring claims would help minimize mistakes and expedite submissions. A built-in messaging system would facilitate direct communication between providers and insurers, and real-time feedback tools—similar to those used by TELUS Health—could resolve issues quickly. Additionally, there should be a system to provide clear adjudication feedback, improving transparency and reducing delays. Thank you for taking the time to consider this feedback. I am hopeful that these important updates will be implemented, ensuring better outcomes for both professionals and those we serve. |
|
| Intersectoriel | [2024-011] Stephanie Anglin - Innovative Occupational Therapy Services
As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, Professional Services Guideline, HCAI System, and Minor Injury Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue. First, specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. The Professional Service Guideline Fee Guideline is no longer compatible with market rates for professional services, causing many to leave the industry. Moreover, Regulated Professionals such as Social Workers and Psychotherapists are not currently listed, resulting in reduced rates for services at the insurer’s discretion. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Second, the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) cap should be increased to $15,000 and indexed to inflation. This would ensure that individuals receive adequate funding for necessary treatments, ultimately reducing reliance on the public healthcare system. The $65,000.00 cap for non-catastrophically impaired clients does not suffice for serious injuries. Oftentimes this funding is exhausted within a year and there is a 1-year gap before an application can be submitted for catastrophic determination and as such I advocate for the amount to be increased to improve the health outcomes of people involved in motor vehicle accidents. The catastrophic determination cap should return to $2,000,000.00 as prior to 2016, again, the current amount of funding does not suffice to rehabilitate and support individuals with catastrophic injuries. Third, the HCAI system must be modernized. Key features like autofill, real-time error checking, and automation for recurring claims would help minimize mistakes and expedite submissions. A built-in messaging system would facilitate direct communication between providers and insurers, and real-time feedback tools—similar to those used by TELUS Health—could resolve issues quickly. Additionally, there should be a system to provide clear adjudication feedback, improving transparency and reducing delays. Thank you for taking the time to consider this feedback. I am hopeful that these important updates will be implemented, ensuring better outcomes for both professionals and those we serve. |
|
[2024-011] Tyler Jensen - Ontario Bar Association
Please accept the enclosed as the Ontario Bar Association's submission. |
||
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Lisa Carter
I am an OT that has been working in the auto sector for over 15 years. I find it shocking that we have not had a rate change in over 10 years, in addition to removing mileage from providers several years ago. There is a massive shortage of OTs in this sector and we are doing very important work that can impact the lives of these accident survivors. We are using our own cars and gas to visit clients in the community. Adjusters are often denying OCF 18 form fees, indirect treatment time and shortening our recommended service time that is making our service delivery very difficult- as we have need to follow COTO guidelines and they are often not giving us time to do it. Many companies are moving away from auto as it becomes increasingly difficult to navigate- leaving the sector short staffed in general for OTs. Clients are having to wait longer for services as a result. Please consider increasing our rates- as ALL other sectors have had increases as per inflation over 10 years. Thank you. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Neha Hasan Gill - Rehab First Inc.
As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents for the last ten years, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, and the Professional Services Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue. Specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Restricted rates in PSG, that are outdated and not in line with inflation and cost of living, are driving health are professionals out of this industry. We face a concerning shortage which is resulting in delays of the required treatment for our severely injured clients. This risks prolonging clients' recovery process and placing an increased burden on the publicly funded healthcare system. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Nick Gurevich - FunctionAbility Rehabilitation Services
Please find attached my submission with respect to consultation on the PSG. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] SEN HOONG PHANG - Propel Physiotherapy
Hello, Over the course of my career as a Registered Physiotherapist, I have observed clinics, clinicians, and support persons move away from providing treatment to people who have been involved in a motor-vehicle injury. This ultimately limits the access to care that people in Ontario have and increases the wait times to be seen by institutions still servicing these types injuries. Ultimately, the fee schedule from FSRA for people involved in MVAs must be updated to reflect the current landscape and economy. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Wanda Chen Registered Physiotherapist - Freedom In Movement Physiotherapy and Wellness
The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario ensures the standard of practice of physiotherapists in Ontario. There is no need for another regulator to overlook the quality of service physiotherapists provide for motor vehicle accident injuries. If a physiotherapist is not practicing according to the standard of practice, he or she should be reported to the College, which is equipped and mandated to protect the public with necessary procedures to ensure the standard of practice is followed. The expensive funding for independent assessments to double-check on physiotherapists' work and recommendations should be redirected to patient care. Sometimes patients need more time to recover and slowly transition back to working and normal daily chores. With proper support, patients can get stronger over time and avoid chronic pain or pain resurfacing. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Jackie Sinkeldam - Eramosa Physiotherapy Associates
I listened to the most recent webinar. Following this webinar I have several follow up questions or comments:1. HCP fees need to be adjusted. They have not been reviewed since 2014. How do good quality clinics pay their HCP, when at the same time all other pay overhead is increasing. Why would we continue to see clients from this sector? The proposal to leave the fees the same should NOT be considered. We continue to loose HCP to "boutique clinics" that do not have this extra layer of paperwork. If the goal is to have great clinical care, the fees need to account for the extra time spent on paperwork so that we can appropriately compensation everyone involved. 2. It was suggested that clients ARE able to access HCP. I disagree. We are in 8 cities. MANY clinics in each city that we are in have opted out of HCAI because of HCAI fees and paperwork. We continue to service these clients after an automobile incident, however; evaluate whether it is worth the admin burden. The clinics that do NEED referrals are often the ones that continue, and not always the clinics with great clinical care. So Auto clients are NOT always getting the best care possible 3. When is the billing to Extended Health Insurance being dropped? This adds another layer of complexity 4. If FRSA is there to decrease fraudulent billing, is there data to suggest that they are finding fraudulent billing? Our audits are always a burden, and find minor admin issues, and not fraudulent billing. If there are resources to answer any of my questions, please send to my email thank you. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Miranda Mo - Miranda Mo & Associates
Summary of recommendations for the Consultation on auto reforms: As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, Professional Services Guideline, HCAI System, and Minor Injury Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue. First, specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Second, the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) cap should be increased to $15,000 and indexed to inflation. This would ensure that individuals receive adequate funding for necessary treatments, ultimately reducing reliance on the public healthcare system. Third, the HCAI system must be modernized. Key features like autofill, real-time error checking, and automation for recurring claims would help minimize mistakes and expedite submissions. A built-in messaging system would facilitate direct communication between providers and insurers, and realtime feedback tools—similar to those used by TELUS Health—could resolve issues quickly. Additionally, there should be a system to provide clear adjudication feedback, improving transparency and reducing delays. Thank you for taking the time to consider our feedback. We are hopeful that these important updates will be implemented, ensuring better outcomes for both professionals and those we serve. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | [2024-011] Kate Skeggs - Balance Rehabilitation
Summary of recommendations for the Consultation on auto reforms: As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, Professional Services Guideline, HCAI System, and Minor Injury Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue. First, specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Second, the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) cap should be increased to $15,000 and indexed to inflation. This would ensure that individuals receive adequate funding for necessary treatments, ultimately reducing reliance on the public healthcare system. Third, the HCAI system must be modernized. Key features like autofill, real-time error checking, and automation for recurring claims would help minimize mistakes and expedite submissions. A built-in messaging system would facilitate direct communication between providers and insurers, and realtime feedback tools—similar to those used by TELUS Health—could resolve issues quickly. Additionally, there should be a system to provide clear adjudication feedback, improving transparency and reducing delays. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Sarah Palmer
As a professional working with individuals who have sustained serious injuries in motor vehicle accidents, I see firsthand the need for updates to the Form 1 Assessment, Professional Services Guideline, HCAI System, and Minor Injury Guideline. These changes are not only necessary but long overdue.First, specific rates should be removed from both the Form 1 Assessment and the Professional Services Guideline, allowing professionals to charge market rates. While the Form 1 can prescribe a certain number of minutes for various services, no fixed dollar amounts should be tied to them. Clients can assess whether fees are reasonable and to choose their preferred provider based on value and quality of care. Second, the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) cap should be increased to $15,000 and indexed to inflation. This would ensure that individuals receive adequate funding for necessary treatments, ultimately reducing reliance on the public healthcare system. Third, the HCAI system must be modernized. Key features like autofill, real-time error checking, and automation for recurring claims would help minimize mistakes and expedite submissions. A built-in messaging system would facilitate direct communication between providers and insurers, and real-time feedback tools—similar to those used by TELUS Health—could resolve issues quickly. Additionally, there should be a system to provide clear adjudication feedback, improving transparency and reducing delays. Thank you for taking the time to consider our feedback. We are hopeful that these important updates will be implemented, ensuring better outcomes for both professionals and those we serve. |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Sindhuja Ramasamy - greater toronto adjusters
Dear FSRA Team,I hope this message finds you well. My name is Sindy Ramasamy, and I have been working in the insurance industry, specifically in claims, for almost 8 years. With my experience in the field, I have observed various challenges that drivers, insurers, and regulators face, especially as the automotive landscape continues to evolve with the rise of electric vehicles, ride-sharing, and technological advancements. In light of these developments, I would like to propose several changes to Ontario's auto insurance policies, which may also be beneficial for consideration in provinces like Alberta, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. These changes would help modernize the insurance offerings to better serve today’s drivers and meet the demands of an evolving marketplace. Key Proposals for Auto Insurance Policy Updates: Expanded Coverage for Electric Vehicles (EVs): Battery and Charging Station Coverage: Given the increasing adoption of electric vehicles, policies should explicitly cover risks related to EV batteries, home charging stations, and potential malfunctions. Fuel Reimbursement (Electric Equivalent): With the growth of electric cars like Teslas, “Loss of Use” coverage should be updated to include fuel reimbursement, or its electric equivalent, during repairs. Ride-Sharing Endorsements: Comprehensive Ride-Sharing Coverage: As more drivers rely on ride-sharing platforms such as Uber and Lyft, a dedicated endorsement should be developed to provide clear coverage across all stages of a ride (e.g., waiting for passengers, driving to pickups, and transporting passengers). EV-Specific Policies for Ride-Sharing: As many ride-share drivers now use electric vehicles, tailored policies addressing the higher costs of repairs and availability of parts for EVs should be considered. Loss of Use Coverage Updates: Expanded Options for Alternative Transportation: Loss of Use coverage should include modern transportation alternatives, such as ride-sharing services and public transportation, in addition to traditional rental vehicles. Higher Cap for EV Rentals: Recognizing that renting an EV can be more expensive than conventional vehicles, policies should adjust their rental car reimbursement limits accordingly. Telematics-Based Insurance: Usage-Based Insurance (UBI): More widespread adoption of telematics could allow for premiums based on driving behavior, rewarding safe driving and reducing costs for infrequent drivers. Data Privacy Protection: With telematics comes the need for clear rules on data privacy to ensure that the personal information collected is used responsibly and transparently. Autonomous and Semi-Autonomous Vehicle Coverage: Liability in Autonomous Mode: Policies should clearly define how liability is allocated when vehicles are in semi-autonomous or fully autonomous modes, particularly when accidents occur. Product Liability for Manufacturers: As vehicle technology evolves, it may become necessary to further clarify the division of liability between drivers, manufacturers, and software providers when autonomous systems are involved in accidents. Climate-Related Coverage: Enhanced Coverage for Severe Weather Events: As severe weather events become more frequent due to climate change, policies should expand coverage for flood damage, hailstorms, and other weather-related risks. Eco-Friendly Vehicle Incentives: Introducing premium discounts for hybrid and electric vehicle owners would help encourage environmentally conscious driving behaviors. Cross-Provincial Standardization: Harmonized Coverage Across Provinces: Since many Canadians travel or move between provinces, aligning policy standards across jurisdictions would provide greater consistency and fairness in coverage, especially for frequent travelers. Cybersecurity for Connected Vehicles: Cyber Attack Coverage: As vehicles become more connected, the potential for cyber-attacks increases. Policies should address the risks associated with cybersecurity threats, including data breaches or malicious attacks that could impair vehicle performance. Digitization and Simplification of Claims: Fully Digital Claims Process: Insurers should provide a streamlined digital claims process, allowing for virtual inspections, real-time updates, and faster settlements. AI-Powered Claims Handling: Leveraging AI to assess damage and expedite claims for minor accidents would improve the efficiency of claims handling and provide a better customer experience. These proposals aim to ensure that Ontario's auto insurance policies are aligned with current trends in technology, transportation, and environmental considerations. I believe these updates would benefit both consumers and insurers, offering a more comprehensive, equitable, and modern approach to auto insurance. Thank you for your time and consideration. I would be more than happy to discuss these suggestions in further detail or participate in any consultations regarding potential changes to auto insurance policies. Sincerely, Sindy Ramasamy, ACIP, CRM |
|
| Secteur de l'assurance automobile | [2024-011] Bhavesh
The fees for health care is not justified, they are so much underpaid and never keep up with inflation or expertise . Why are this health care worker underpaid ! Why aren’t we doing anything to pay them well and also the funding option is limited - in other province for $$ they spend for car insurance and benefit are completely different then what we get here in ontario |
| Date posted | Secteur | Question et réponse |
|---|---|---|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | Question: Is there an email address to submit a comment if we do not want to post online? FSRA réponse: Comments can be submitted to FSRA's contact center by emailing us at [email protected]; however, please note that by submitting your content, you agree to have your materials posted on our engagement portal, used in reports and other materials prepared by Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) that may be shared with the public. Content is moderated so that all posts are respectful and professional. The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.F.31, applies to all online content. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | Question: Hello, FSRA réponse: The scope of the SABS Guideline review is limited to HSP rates and fees set out in the following three SABS Guidelines:
Stakeholder feedback which is outside the scope of this review will be considered for future FSRA reviews and/or will be shared with the Ministry of Finance. |
|
| Intersectoriel | Question: is there an email address to submit responses instead of this portal. I can't seem to get the web page to work well. FSRA réponse: Comments can be submitted to FSRA's contact center by emailing us at [email protected]; however, please note that by submitting your content, you agree to have your materials posted on our engagement portal, used in reports and other materials prepared by Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) that may be shared with the public. Content is moderated so that all posts are respectful and professional. The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.F.31, applies to all online content. |
|
| Secteur des services de soins de santé | Question: It has been over a decade since the fees for providers under MVA's have changed I am wondering when the government will update to current rates. My second question is why they change the rates for Cat and no-cat rates. No health care provider changes their treatment for a person based on fees. There really should not be a difference between categories and Health care providers fees. I do understand the need for designation when if comes to the max allowed from insurers but as a health care provider I do not feel it is truly meeting your mandate for fairness for consumers. I have been working in this industry for over a decade and am seeing the stress for consumers from insurers after an automobile accident increase. The percentage of denials has increased and the IE's no longer seem impartial. What is being done on a government level to protect the consumers from this trend. . I would also like to know what is being done to help provide service to Rural Ontarians with insurance. Service is lacking and providers are required to travel and denials for that are high. FSRA réponse: Thank you for your questions. FSRA's current review of the SABS Guidelines seeks stakeholder feedback on options related to the fees/rates paid to health service providers. The consultation paper sets out proposed options for the Professional Services Guideline, Attendant Care Hourly Rate Guideline, and the Minor Injury Guideline, as well as questions stakeholders are invited to answer. FSRA is also conducting reviews of the Health Service Provider Framework and of the Health Claims for Auto Insurance System. We welcome your feedback on FSRA's auto reform reviews. Please note that the consultation closes on Friday, November 29. |