A British Columbia tribunal dismissed an accident benefits claim as out of time, ruling insurers need not warn claimants about limitation deadlines.
The Civil Resolution Tribunal decision, issued July 6, 2026, gives claims professionals a clean illustration of how strictly statutory limitation periods apply to accident benefits disputes, and how little duty an insurer has to educate claimants about them.
The case concerned entitlement to Part 7 benefits under British Columbia's Insurance (Vehicle) Regulation, which the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia administers. The claimant was in a motor vehicle accident on July 10, 2019, and sought a decision on her entitlement to medical benefits.
The applicant reported the accident to ICBC on November 20, 2019. An adjuster followed up a week later with information about the claims process and asked her to complete an Insurance Claim Application. She returned it on June 3, 2020. The adjuster, noting their last contact had been the previous November, said ICBC could still review the case but that claims had to be reported within a reasonable time frame.
On June 16, 2020, an ICBC manager advised that under the regulation, an insured must give notice of an accident within 30 days. Because that had not happened, ICBC would not honour the claim.
There was no evidence the applicant responded to the denial. She said she had a lawyer at some point but gave no details, and later hired a different one. On November 20, 2023, that new lawyer gave ICBC written notice of an intention to start an action for Part 7 benefits.
The notice came too late. Vice Chair Kristin Gardner explained that under section 103 of the regulation, a claimant who has not filed the required written notice must bring an action within two years of the accident, or within two years of the last benefit payment. ICBC had paid no benefits, so the deadline was July 10, 2021.
The applicant argued ICBC never told her about the notice requirement. Gardner rejected that, finding it was not the insurer's role to provide legal advice, particularly given the limited communication between the parties and the earlier denial. There was no suggestion ICBC had misled her, and Gardner noted that ignorance of the law does not postpone a limitation period.
The applicant also argued the tribunal could allow a claim past the deadline where a claimant is clearly prejudiced. Gardner distinguished the earlier cases she relied on, noting those plaintiffs had filed within the limitation period. She found the regulation's language mandatory, not permissive.
The applicant filed her tribunal application on June 27, 2025, but did not pay the required fee until September 16, 2025, more than four years after the deadline. "This is a final decision dismissing this dispute because it is out of time," Gardner wrote.
The tribunal dismissed the claim and ordered the applicant to reimburse ICBC $25 in fees.
