Subscribe to the ICBC Law Blog 
Subscribe via Email 
Visit my Linked In profile 
Follow me on Twitter 
Visit my JDSupra profile 
Visit my Facebook Business page 
Free Video Consultations via SKYPE
Media Requests
Client Satisfaction Survey
Who’s That in the Bushes? ICBC Surveillance and You
A concern many BC personal injury clients have is the threat of surveillance when they are advancing an ICBC injury claim. Video surveillance is legal in British Columbia so this threat is real.
The thought of video surveillance is unsavory to say the least. What concerns me, however, is not that ICBC may be conducting video surveillance, rather the misconseption that some BC personal injury claimants have regarding their behaviour and potential surveillance. I have been asked many times “Should I watch out because there may be surveillance” or “Should I limit my activities out in public because if I get filmed being active that will hurt my claim“.
My answer to this question is as follows: Video surveillance does not hurt a personal injury claim, overstating the effects of injuries does. It does not matter if you’re painting your house, lifting weights, or doing any number of physical activities that are caught on film. If you can be active and not aggravate your injuries that is a good thing. If, on the other hand, a personal injury claimaint tells others that they are limited and video surveillance shows otherwise, that could be very damaging. This goes to a person’s credibility. If a person is caught in a lie with respect to the effect of their injuries that will have a very negative effect on the value of an ICBC claim.
I like to assure people advancing ICBC claims that they need not live life any differently because of an ICBC claim or because of the threat of video surveillance. It is lies and lies alone that have the most damaging impact on a personal injury claim. If you are honest about your injuries and their impact on your life video surveillance should not be a concerning threat. In fact, with an honest plaintiff, video surveillance should appear as nothing more than an unsavory insurance tactic.
Tags: credibility, icbc, ICBC claim, injury, suveillance, video
This site is created by MacIsaac & Company, a British Columbia Personal Injury Lawfirm. This website is not affiliated in any way with the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC).This web site is made possible through funding provided by the British Columbia law firm MacIsaac and Company. bc-injury-law.com is designed to empower individuals to better understand their ICBC Claim and the process involved in dealing with ICBC. This web site is offered for information only and is not claim-specific legal advice. Use of the site and sending or receiving information through it does not establish a solicitor / client relationship. Links to and from this website do not state or imply a relationship between MacIsaac and Company and the linked entity.
April 13th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
[…] As I’ve previously posted, Video surveillance does not in and of itself hurt a personal injury claim, overstating the effects of injuries does. It does not matter if you’re painting your house, lifting weights, or doing any number of physical activities that are caught on film. If you can be active and not aggravate your injuries that is a good thing. If, on the other hand, a personal injury claimaint tells others that they are limited and video surveillance shows otherwise, that could be very damaging. This goes to a person’s credibility. If a person is caught in a lie with respect to the effect of their injuries that will have a very negative effect on the value of an ICBC claim. If you found this article useful please share with others: […]
June 19th, 2010 at 10:42 am
[…] As I’ve previously posted, video surveillance can and does occur and it can be intrusive. Â However, video surveillance in and of itself does not harm a person’s injury claim. Â Damage is only done if the video demonstrates that the Plaintiff has not been truthful about their injuries / limitations. Â In today’s case Madam Justice Maisonville was quick to dismiss the impact of video that did not contradict the Plaintiff’s evidence as can be seen from the following passage: […]
August 31st, 2011 at 6:59 am
[…] always I welcome others views, feel free to leave a comment. Â You can click here to read a 2008 article sharing some of my views of video surveillance. If you found this article useful please share […]