A British Columbia tribunal has upheld ICBC's 75% fault finding against a driver who struck a flatbed truck attempting a right turn in Vancouver.
The dispute, Han v. ICBC, 2026 BCCRT 816, came before the Civil Resolution Tribunal after Lijing Han and Jiawei Zhang challenged ICBC's responsibility assessment for a May 16, 2024 collision near the intersection of Clark Drive and 12th Avenue. They sought $2,500, covering a $375 deductible refund and increased premiums.
The mechanics of the crash were not really in doubt. Han, driving Zhang's Tesla SUV, was northbound on Clark Drive behind a flatbed truck driven by a third party identified only as BM. After both cleared the 12th Avenue intersection, BM began turning right into an alley. Han's front driver's-side bumper struck the side of BM's truck cab.
The drivers told different stories about what came before. Han said he stayed in the right-most lane and that BM moved into the middle lane before swinging back to the right. He told ICBC he never saw a right turn signal. BM, in a July 18, 2024 statement to ICBC, said the truck was straddling lanes one and two while signaling for the right turn, and that Han collided as BM began the maneuver. A witness, JT, who saw the collision from about two cars back, told ICBC that BM signaled early, swung left to make a wide right turn, and that Han accelerated.
ICBC concluded Han was 75% responsible and BM was 25% responsible. The insurer cited Motor Vehicle Act sections 144 and 158(2)(a) against Han for driving without due care and passing on the right when unsafe. It also faulted BM under sections 144 and 165 for failing to maintain a lookout and not turning as close to the curb as practicable. One of the applicants paid the $375 deductible, and Zhang's premiums increased.
Tribunal Member Amanda Binnie was not persuaded that ICBC got it wrong. The applicants, she found, had not proven BM's turn signal was off. Han had said only that he did not see it activated, which left open the possibility that he never looked. Photos showed the distance between the intersection and the alleyway was short, making it unlikely BM had time to fully change lanes after the red light. And Han did not deny accelerating after BM began changing lanes.
Binnie also rejected the applicants' attempt to attack JT's credibility, calling the suggestion that the witness fabricated the statement speculative and unproven. ICBC, she noted, had called JT back for follow-up, and JT had agreed contact details could be shared with police.
The claim for future premium increases failed on two fronts. The tribunal said the amount was speculative and, in any event, its small claims jurisdiction does not allow it to order ICBC to keep premiums flat. The accident-responsibility jurisdiction that might have offered relief required the applicants to file their dispute within 90 days of ICBC issuing its detailed responsibility letter, but because the tribunal found Han had not been shown to be less than 75% responsible, it did not address that issue further.
"I find Mr. Han was negligent," Binnie wrote in the May 26, 2026 decision. The claims were dismissed in full.
