Is Surveillance An Investigative Tool Used By ICBC?

The Insurance Corporation British Columbia (ICBC) uses investigative tools to search for specific facts. ICBC hopes that its investigations will uncover facts that can be used to discredit specific claimants.

Types of investigations used

Open source: That is when the investigators search the Internet, looking for pictures that show the claimant taking part in some activity that required the movement of bones, muscles or other body parts that the same claimant had said were not yet recovered from a specific injury.

Actual: Here the investigators’ tactics mirror those of someone who has taken on the role of a detective. In other words, the investigators’ time gets spent following the claimant that ICBC would like to discredit. The extent to which any search gets pursued depends on the complexity of the case presented by the injured victim, the person that filed the complaint.

Personal Injury Lawyer in Abbotsford understands that ICBC does not waste its time investigating the claims of someone with a minor injury. Instead, it searches for proof that someone that has reported having a major industry does not suffer the degree of discomfort, or the extent of a loss of mobility that was reported on a form that was sent to ICBC’s offices.

What is the government’s attitude toward ICBC’s investigations?

The government allows ICBC to use its investigative tools, as long as each of them serves only as a means for uncovering facts. If any tool gets utilized to operate more than a fact-finding service, the government can take steps to bring an end to such actions. In other words, the government stands prepared to take action, if one of ICBC’s investigators has tried to intimidate a claimant.

How might an investigator intimidate one of the claimants? It would arrange for an intrusive procedure to be carried-out, in hopes of unearthing useful information. That intrusive procedure would almost certainly act as an invasion into the claimant’s privacy. The Provincial government does not sanction an act that invades the privacy of a resident of British Columbia.

When a private citizen commits an unsanctioned act, a violation of the law, that citizen could get hit with the need to pay a fee. The government pursues a similar action, if it finds that ICBC has tried to intimidate one of its claimants.

The government realizes that the Insurance Corporation British Columbia must pay for the costs of an injured victim. If that same victim has been the target of efforts aimed at intimidation, then the court stands ready to add to the costs that ICBC must pay that same victim.

Those added costs serve the same function as a fine; each of them represents a form of mild punishment. ICBC’s bank account feels the punishment’s sting.