Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-14-051 - Municipal Liability Reform Staff Report I r finance and Corporate Services Department wvwuukitchenerra REPORT TO: Finance and Corporate Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: April 7, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Chapman, DCAO— Finance & Corporate Services 519- 741-2200 x 7347 PREPARED BY: Craig Smith, Risk Manager 519-741-2200 x 7959 Lind Korabo, Executive Assistant 519-741-2200 x 7591 WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: March 10, 2014 REPORT NO.: FCS-14-051 SUBJECT: Municipal Liability Reform RECOMMENDATION: That the City of Kitchener support the Association of Municipalities of Ontario's recommendation to adopt a `Combined Model' of Legislative Reform to address the issue of the inequitable effects of Joint and Several Liability on municipal insurance claims; and further, That the Mayor be directed to forward a supporting letter to the Premier of Ontario, the Provincial Attorney General and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. BACKGROUND: At the February 10, 2014 Council meeting, Mayor C. Zehr introduced the issue of Joint and Several Liability and requested Council's support of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario's (AMO) position on the matter. The following resolution was adopted and subsequently forwarded on February 11, 2014 to Premier Kathleen Wynne with copies to various other individuals: "WHEREAS a private member's resolution was introduced by Randy Pettapiece, MPP for Perth-Wellington, which calls on the Government of Ontario to implement comprehensive reform to joint and several liability by June 2014; and, WHEREAS debate on this motion is scheduled for February 27, 2014 and feedback has been requested from municipal councils by no later than February 14, 2014; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Kitchener endorse the position taken by the Association of Municipalities of Ontario in support of the private member's resolution regarding joint and several liability; and, 1 - 1 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be sent to the leaders of all three parties in the Ontario Legislature, the Attorney General, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, all local area MPP's and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario." On March 4, 2014, AMO sent correspondence to all municipalities (attached as Appendix `A') requesting municipalities to send additional correspondence to the Premier. AMO supports the adoption of the "combined model" as outlined in its correspondence. This places some reasonable limits on the damages that may be recovered from a municipality under limited circumstances. The Ministry of the Attorney General is seeking comments by April 16, 2014. Staff fully supports this request as Joint and Several Liability has a profound effect on municipal claim settlements. REPORT: The joint and several provisions of the Negligence Act, indicate, "Where damages have been caused or contributed to by the fault or neglect of two or more persons,...and, where two or more persons are found at fault or negligent, they are jointly and severally liable to the person suffering the loss or damage..." Also known as the 1% rule, the joint and several provisions may oblige a defendant, which is only 1% at fault, to pay the plaintiff's entire judgment. For example, if a person is catastrophically injured in a motor vehicle accident which is 90% the fault of the driver of the vehicle and 10% the fault of the municipality for failing to maintain the road, both the driver and the municipality are jointly liable for 100% of the plaintiff's damages. Accordingly, in the foregoing example, if those damages are assessed at $6 million, and the driver has only $1 million of insurance, then the plaintiff can recover $5 million from the municipality, notwithstanding that it was only 10% at fault. Although the municipality should only have paid $600,000 and has the right to recover the $4.4 million overpayment from the driver, the judgment is worthless if the driver has no assets other than the $1 million insurance policy. The main benefit is for plaintiffs and provides them with the best opportunity to be fully compensated. Without it, plaintiffs, often innocent victims, might be limited in their ability to recover damages. However, the main problem is fairness for defendants. It is unfair for a defendant whose degree of fault is minor, when compared to that of other defendants, to have to fully compensate a plaintiff should the other defendants be impecunious. The effect of joint and several liability is that it can put pressure on municipalities to avoid protracted expensive litigation by settling for amounts that may be excessive, or certainly represent a greater percentage than their degree of fault. 1 - 2 Municipalities are most often exposed to the effects of joint and several liability arising from motor vehicle accidents alleging road design problems and/or improper winter maintenance and claims alleging negligent building inspection and claims alleging an improper response by Police, Fire and EMS services. Essentially the Waterloo Region Municipal Insurance Pool is exposed in any litigation where it is a co-defendant and the main target defendant either has no or insufficient insurance coverage or assets to respond to pay the plaintiff's claim. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: Foundation: Effective and Efficient Government Goal: Financial Management Long-term corporate financial stability and fiscal accountability for our taxpayers. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Joint and Several Liability has a profound effect on municipal claim settlements, which are funded though the City's insurance reserve. Staff recommends that the City support the request from AMO. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted publicly with the agenda prior to the Committee meeting. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Dan Chapman, Deputy CAO, Finance and Corporate Services 1 - 3 APPENDIX `A' To., Craig Dyer, Subject. RE AM O Breaking to -)otlint and Seve4 Ljab4ity From: AMO Communications Sent:March 4, 2014 6:!016 PM1 To:Craig Dyer Subject:AMO Breaking News-Joint and Several Uabillty TO THE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION OF THE CLERKMIND COUINCIL March 4,2014 Legislature Supports Motion on Municipal Liability Reform—More Municipal Artion Needed On February 7,21114,MPPs firorn all Parties supported a motion calling on the government to reform, joint and several liability,. Passage ol'this resolution marks a significant milestone in the municipal campaign for reform.Now that the issue has Captured the attention ofthe 1,egislaturc,it is firne fbr your municipality to corviider the endorsement of a more detailed legislative solution. Nearly 200 municipalities supported the motion introduced by Randy Penapiece, N(PP for Perth- Wc1lington which called on the government to implement a comprehensive, long-terra solution no later than June 2014.Many,more also wrote to the Attorney General,the.honourable John Crerretsen in !response to A M01's February 7,2014 call for support„ Currently,the Ministry of the Attorney G,eneral is consulting municipalities and the legal community on a,comprehensive long-term solution.The Ministry describes three options below: The Saskatchewan,model,: Tins modification,to joint and several liability was adopted,in Saskatchewan in 2004.Under the Saskatchewan model,where there is a shcull'all due to one defendant being irtsolvent and the plainfifts own negligence contributed to the harm,the shortfall is to be div,i,ded among the remaining defendants and the plaintiff in proportion lo,their fault,This model would apply to all types of defendants in all types ofacgligcnee claims. The Multiplier model. In road authority cases,(auto accident cases in which a municipality is sued for breach of duty to maintain a public road),where there is a shortfall due to one defendant being insolvent, the municiralitywould never be liable for more,than two times its Proportion of daniages,even if this means that a plaintiff doesnot hilly recover, Because this rule leas the potential to result in a Seriously injured plainfiffbeing unable to fully recover,the proposal would be limited to municipalities and to the specific subset of cases that municipalities tell us inilmse the most significant and unfair burden,—road authority cases,, The Combined model:1"he Saskatchewan rnodcl and the Multiplier model could be combined, In a case in which Nit,h models would apply—a road authority case involving contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff--the Saskatchewan model would be applied first,The Multiplier model would be applied if nee-ded to ensure that the rmmicipality Nvould not be liable for more than two times its proportion of damages,, t. 1 - 4 AMO supports the adopted of the""Combined model"listed above.This places some reasonable limits on the damages that may be recovered from a municipality under limited circumstances.It is a significant incremental step to address a pressing municipal issue. The Ministry of the Attorney General is seeking your comments by April 16,2014.. We urge all municipalities to express their support for this combined model.This includes municipalities which supported either the Pettapiece motion or A.MO's form letter of February 7,2014. Below is a draft letter for municipalities to submit to the provincial government by April 16,2014. Please add your community's voice of support to this solution. 1 - 5 The Honourable Kathleen Wynne Premier of Ontario Legislative Building-Room 281 Queen's Park Toronto ON M7A IAl 'The Honourable John Gerretsen Attorney General McMurtry-Scott Building 720 Bay Street—I l th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2S9 The Honourable Linda Jeffrey Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777"Bay Street- 17th Floor Toronto ON M56 2E5 Dear Premier,Attorney General,MMAH Minister: f I or we]support the government's consideration and adoption of measures which limit the impact of .joint and several liability on municipalities.Specifically,we understand three options are under consideration the Saskatchewan Model,the Multiplier Model,or a third model which combines both. I write to you.in support of this third Combined Model as described by AMO's March 4,2014 policy update.We support AMO's advice to the government that such changes would represent a significant incremental step to address a pressing municipal issue.This places some reasonable limits on the damages that may be recovered from a municipality under limited circumstances. The provisions of the Negligence Act have not been updated for decades and the legislation was never intended to place the burden of insurer of last resort on municipalities.It is entirely unfair to ask municipalities to carry the lion's share of a damage award when at minimal fault or to assume responsibility for someone else's mistake. For this reason,fl or wel support,the adoption of the Combined Model under consideration.We strongly encourage the government to immediately proceed with legislation which gives effect to this model. Sincerely, Name cc:AMCI AMO Contact:Matthew Wilson,Senior Advisor,416-971-9556 Ext.323 or mwilson a o.on.ca. 3 1 - 6