Canada: The Worth Of "Diminished Value" Claims In Ontario – Update

Last Updated: June 11 2019
Article by Helen D.K. Friedman

In past blogs,1 my colleague, Patricia Forte, has tracked the case law on the state of "diminished value" claims in Ontario.  A recent Superior Court case, Zheng v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Co.,2 provides further insight as to the limited "value" of advancing a diminished value claim against the vehicle owner's own insurer.

By way of background, the concept of "diminished value" under review is the perceived loss of value of a vehicle following an accident-related repair.  The substance of the claim is that an informed purchaser will pay less for a vehicle that has been in an accident than the same buyer would pay had the same vehicle not been involved in an accident.

In certain Canadian provinces, like British Columbia and Alberta, individuals can sue tortfeasors at fault for an auto accident for the diminished value of the vehicle.  Diminished value claims in tort are permitted in some U.S. states, and some states permit individuals to claim diminished value loss under their own automobile policies.

Volkswagen recognized a (non-insurance related) subset of diminished value claims in its agreement to settle the lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency arising out of TDI (diesel) vehicles.  Volkswagen agreed to buy back or, if approved, repair vehicles affected by the recall.  In either case, Volkswagen agreed to provide owners with an additional "restitution payment" to compensate owners for the diminished value of their vehicles.  As of October 26, 2015, the resale value of affected model cars in the U.S. was down by between 5% and nearly 16%, depending on models, as compiled from used auction prices by Black Book and Kelley Blue Book.3

Diminished value is a legitimate consumer concern.  Some automobiles, such as pristine collector automobiles, may suffer significant diminished value in the resale market if they are damaged and then repaired.

Since Ontario introduced its "no fault" auto insurance regime in 1990, s. 263 of the Insurance Act4 has barred claims for recovery of damages to an insured's automobile, to its contents and for loss of use against anyone other than the insured's insurer.  In order for s. 263 to apply, the following criteria must be met:

  1. An automobile or its contents, or both, suffers damage arising directly or indirectly from the use or operation in Ontario of one or more other automobiles;
  2. The automobile that suffers damage, or in respect of which the contents suffer damage, is insured under a motor vehicle liability policy issued by an insurer licenced to undertake automobile insurance in Ontario; and
  3. At least one other automobile involved in the accident is insured under a motor vehicle liability policy issued by an insurer licenced to undertake automobile insurance in Ontario.

Section 263(5)(a.1) permits an exception to a right of action between two insureds if:

(1) there is an agreement for the damage, content, loss of use; and

(2) the agreement must be between the plaintiff and the person at fault (negligent) for the damage.

These exception based cases would typically arise in a circumstance where a tortfeasor agrees to pay the cost to repair a plaintiff's vehicle following an accident without the parties resorting to their insurance.  Subject to this limited exception, s. 263(2) provides that the insured is entitled to recover property damage to the vehicle, its contents and loss of use from their own insurer.

As noted in our earlier blogs, the case law establishes diminished value claims with a basis in tort against the driver of another insured vehicle will not succeed in Ontario.  Tort actions against uninsured motorists for single vehicle accidents or non-auto tortfeasors can presumably proceed.  Non-tort claims, i.e. claims based in contract, may be permitted.

In Zheng, Justice Petersen of the Superior Court addressed Ms. Zheng's appeal from the dismissal of her claim for diminished value in the Brampton Small Claims Court.  Ms. Zheng was represented by the same counsel who appeared in Renwick v. Allstate Insurance Company, 2016 CanLII 44178 (ON SCSM), referenced in our October 11, 2016 blog.

Ms. Zheng was involved in a motor vehicle accident for which she was not at fault.  Her vehicle sustained damage as a result.  A claim was made against her own insurer Certas, who elected to repair the physical damage to her vehicle at their expense.  Despite the repair, Ms. Zheng sought to recover the diminished value of her vehicle from Certas.

At trial, Ms. Zheng provided expert evidence, accepted by Deputy Judge Da Silva, that the value of her vehicle had been diminished by $9,750 due to the accident.  The Court, however, did not accept or award diminished value damages, on the basis s. 6.6 of the Ontario Automobile Policy ("OAP") gives the insurer the right to repair a vehicle rather than pay for the damage.  Deputy Judge Da Silva interpreted the word "rather" in s. 6.6 to mean "either/or".  Certas, therefore, had the right to repair rather than pay damages.  Deputy Judge Da Silva found no ambiguity in s. 6.6 and noted there would be no reasonable expectation on the part of Ms. Zheng to receive compensation for diminished value damages when the insurer had exercised its right to repair.

The Court further found: "diminished value, although it exists in reality, is not included in s. 263(2) of the Insurance Act.   Similarly, it is not in s. 6.2 of the OAP."5 Further, Deputy Judge Da Silva found even if he determined Certas had not elected to repair the vehicle, he still would have dismissed the action on the basis that Certas was not liable for diminished value under the OAP coverage.

As a result, Ms. Zheng appealed on the factual issue of whether Certas had elected to repair her vehicle as well as the legal issue of the trial judge's error in denying payment of diminished value as a component of damages under s. 263(2) of the Insurance Act and s. 6.2 of the OAP.  Certas, in addition to seeking a dismissal of the appeal, brought a cross-appeal arguing the Court erred in accepting diminished value as a type of economic loss and finding diminished value in the amount of $9,750 as a result of the accident.

On appeal, Justice Petersen addressed the appropriate standard of review to be applied to the various issues, noting the standard to be correctness for questions of law and palpable overriding error for questions of fact and mixed fact and law.

On the factual question of whether Certas had exercised its option pursuant to s. 6.6 of the OAP to repair Ms. Zheng's vehicle, Justice Petersen was unable to find a palpable error.  He noted the evidence that Certas assigned an appraiser to evaluate the extent of damage to Ms. Zheng's vehicle, the appraiser recommended to Certas that the car be repaired and based on that recommendation, Certas decided to effect the repairs at its own expense and that decision was communicated to Ms. Zheng.  Certas approved Ms. Zheng's choice of body shop to conduct the repairs, and Ms. Zheng authorized the body shop to do the work.

Ms. Zheng, for her part, argued there was no election to repair as she had not been provided with formal notice in writing of such an election.  She also argued s. 6.6 of the OAP required Certas to "complete the work" if an election to repair is made.  Instead of "completing the work," she argued Certas paid her chosen auto body shop to complete the work.

Justice Petersen found that where provisions of the insurance contract are mandated by law, interpretation of the contract was more akin to statutory interpretation than contractual interpretation.  Statutory interpretation would require an interpretation consistent with the purposes of the Insurance Act, which in accordance with the findings of the Court of Appeal in Clarendon National Insurance v. Candow,6 included a reduction in insurance premiums by eliminating transaction costs inherent in the tort system.

Further, notwithstanding the OAP is a mandated statutory policy, consumer protection remained a consideration, such that words in insurance contracts must be given their plain and ordinary meaning.  In analysis, Justice Petersen noted that if Justice Da Silva had erred in his interpretation of OAP 1, it was an error of law linked to his factual finding; and, therefore, the higher standard of correctness would apply on review.  Applying this standard, Justice Petersen found the trial judge correctly interpreted the OAP and correctly determined Certas elected and exercised its right to repair within the meaning of s. 6.6.

This finding was made despite the fact that Certas did not provide Ms. Zheng with written notice of its decision to repair her vehicle.  Justice Petersen noted that s. 6.6 did not stipulate that written notice was a precondition to the insurer's exercise of its right to repair a vehicle.  Rather, the requirement for written notice arose only after an insurer has made an election to repair.  It is not a precondition to the election taking effect.  In contrast to other sections of the OAP, s. 6.6 does not include the word "must".

It was noted that Ms. Zheng was not prejudiced by Certas' failure to provide her with formal written notice of its election to repair the vehicle.  Ms. Zheng received actual notice of the election within the seven day period, as Certas' decision to repair the vehicle was verbally communicated to her.

Justice Petersen also applied a common sense perspective to the alternate argument that s. 6.6 required Certas to take control of the vehicle and repair it themselves, finding this interpretation was not one an ordinary person would adopt.  Specifically, "ordinary people are well-aware that insurance companies are not in the business of conducting auto body work or automotive repairs."7

Most importantly, however, Justice Petersen rejected Ms. Zheng's argument that Certas' repair of the vehicle did not preclude her claim for damages for diminished value.  Justice Petersen found as follows:

Once Certas elected to exercise its right to repair Ms. Zheng's vehicle "rather than pay for the damage," it was only responsible for the cost of the repairs, up to a maximum of the actual cash value of the vehicle at the time of the accident (per s. 6.2 of the OAP).  Its contractual obligation was simply to repair the vehicle, which it did.8

Having so found, Justice Petersen held that there was no need for him to determine whether the trial judge erred in concluding the claim for diminished value could not have succeeded under the OAP even if Certas had not made the election.  The issue of whether s. 6.2 of the OAP and s. 263(2) of the Insurance Act excluded a diminished value claim did not arise on the facts of the case.  In other words, it was a moot issue.  As such, the Court declined to express an opinion on the trial judge's ruling that diminished value was not a component of the "'cost of damage of the automobile' covered by s. 6.2 of OAP 1."9 The Court further declined to express an opinion of the correctness of the ruling that diminished value does not form part of the "damages to the insured's automobile" within the meaning of s. 263(2) of the Act.  Similarly, the Court did not find it necessary to rule on Certas' cross-appeal as the issues were moot (save for costs).  Costs of appeal were awarded in favour of Certas.

The trend shows diminishing value in pursuing these claims.  That said, the creativity of counsel knows no bounds.  There may yet be an opportunity to "add value" to diminished value claims.

Footnotes

1 The Worth of "Diminished Value" Claims in Ontario, June 20, 2016; Insureds Claiming "Diminished Value" Damages under Ontario's OAP1 Auto Policy, October 11, 2016; Heiner v. Pasha et al; Claiming Diminished Value under Ontario's OAP1 Auto Policy Redux.

2 2019 ONSC 2753 (CanLII).

3 Beene, Ryan (26 October 2015). "Used VW diesel prices nosedive as fix remains unclear",  Autoweek.

4 R.S.O. 1990, c.I8, as amended.

5 2019 ONSC 2753 at para. 18 (CanLII).

6 2007 ONCA 680 (CanLII), paras. 7-11.

7 2019 ONSC 2753 at para. 48 (CanLII).

8 2019 ONSC 2753 at para. 50 (CanLII).

9 2019 ONSC 2753 at para. 53 (CanLII).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions