Cedric Stephens | Time is ripe to overhaul motor accident compensation system

Ten years ago, I wrote that "... victims and dependents of those who were injured or killed in the Portland (market truck) accident are unlikely to get any compensation ..." Sadly, the prediction was spot-on. Last month's review by this newspaper of what is now called the Rio Grande Valley Tragedy, has confirmed that forecast. It also revealed that conditions have not improved despite the passage of time.

Linford Jackson is one example of the scores of persons in the area whose lives were disrupted by dysfunctions in the motor vehicle injury compensation system. The Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third-Party Risks) Act was passed nearly 80 years ago. Its aim was to lessen these kinds of personal catastrophes that have occurred as a result of the mishap. Mr Jackson nearly lost his left leg in the accident. He had hopes of getting an insurance pay-out to ease his pain and suffering and loss of income. This did not happen. "The insurance say dem no business," he was quoted as saying.

People from the area say that the poor road conditions - which they claim contributed to the crash in which 14 persons were killed and many were injured - remain unsatisfactory a decade later.

On January 1, this year, according to The New York Times, scientists from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) released images of an object at the edge of the solar system. NASA's New Horizons spacecraft - which took the photos from 500,000 miles away - has travelled four billion miles during the last 13 years. The icy object, which was formed out of dust and gas, is called Ultima Thule. Scientists believe that the dust and gas orbited the Sun more than 4.5 billion years ago. If American scientists can accomplish this kind of feat and their Chinese counterparts land a space probe on the far side of the moon a few days later, fixing Jamaica's motor accident compensation system should be a simple task.

Team effort

Fixing the problems in the compensation system requires a team effort, much in the same way that the American and Chinese space efforts did. Government alone cannot do the job as my February 1, 2009, article implied. Personal injury attorneys, the police, insurance company regulatory and transportation officials, as well as other representatives from the government sector surely can.

Insurance companies, according to sources in 2009, "lobbied very strongly against providing liability coverage to persons who travelled in the backs of market trucks". Their opposition to providing coverage was based on two arguments. It was the responsibility of the legislature and the police to "ensure that large numbers of persons were not improperly seated in the back of market trucks. The practice should be controlled and regulated" by the authorities.

This was a very lame and self-serving argument. Isn't insurance about managing risks? Even in the absence of a modern road traffic regulatory regime, insurers are not averse to providing protection to persons who travel as passengers in public-passenger vehicles and robot taxis.

The second argument was (incredibly): "If general insurers were forced to indemnify such passengers, then the rates for commercial vehicles like market trucks, inevitably, would have to be increased, massively." No evidence was ever furnished to show that market trucks were involved in more accidents than other types of vehicles or that passengers in these vehicles were more prone to suffer more injuries in crashes. Secondly, motor insurers have never been shy about raising premiums to consumers. My theory is that since the law was passed in the early 1940s when the country was under British rule, insurers took a decision that was solely in their economic interests and ignored their societal duty.

Legislators bowed to insurers' representations. The passenger liability section of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third-Party-Risks) Act was never implemented. Insurance market practice has always been to limit coverage to the number of persons that the vehicle is licensed to carry and who are seated in the cab. Even though Jamaica attained political independence over 50 years ago, lawmakers have not shown any interest in ending this discriminatory practice against rural folk, many of whom are their constituents.

Action is now being taken to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the justice system. Additional judges are to be appointed and improvements in courtroom facilities are underway. In addition, Parliament has recently passed a new Road Traffic Act. Its aim is to update and enhance how traffic is managed and regulated. The time is now ripe for overhauling the motor vehicle insurance compensation system. In "Motor insurance law short-changing victims" (April 1, 2018) and "The smart approach to personal injury coverage" (April 15), I listed a few parts of the Motor Vehicles Insurance (Third-Party Risks) Act, which, in my judgment, and when compared to five other Caribbean nations, need to be revised.

The insurance industry, despite its many faults, has an important role to play in the country's economic development. Complex and high-risk enterprises like space and satellite industries can get coverage for their operations. There is, therefore, no reason why entrepreneurial rural folks in Jamaica who use public transportation to travel to urban areas to sell their produce should not be guaranteed protection when they have the misfortune to be involved in motor vehicle accidents.

- Cedric E. Stephens provides independent information and advice about the management of risks and insurance. For free information and counsel email aegis@flowja.com