M
mustang
Guest
i received a letter from my car ins. co lawyer stateing that they were refusing all accident benefit claims based on a report of a defence doctor. i know the ins. co lawyer paid this doctor alot of money to say that my injuries are not related to the accident.[trying to say pre-exisiting and chronoligically related, but not casually] yet i was not to a doc for back problems in 5 years.[had a muscle spasm 5 years before, but xray showed spine and discs intact] my surgeon who did my back surgery said my back problem was secondary to auto accident.[i had fusion of the spine done] they have not paid me since oct of 98. because of my surgeon and an o.t.stating it was due to the accident, i submitted claims for accident benefits that i had previously been denied. i received the response above. i was in a discussion with a friend, and i thought i would be entitled to punitive[sp] damages for bad faith ins. her response was that no judge would award me damages because the ins. co has this defence doc saying it was not related to the accident. i am sure everyone who has been in an accident has at least one defence doctor to say this...i need to know if i should persue this? thanks.
i live in ontario canada.
i live in ontario canada.