A skilled Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer understands that some of the most serious ICBC MVA injuries are not readily visible. Brain injuries, internal bleeding, whiplash and in many cases psychological trauma such as PTSD don’t show up on X-rays. Our senior Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer team puts a lawyer-not a case manager– in charge of your file from the start. We have 5 offices across BC in Vancouver, Surrey, Kelowna, Richmond and Fort St John, BC. Call us toll free at 1-877-602-9900. We meet with you for free at our offices, your home or even at the hospital. Hiring a top advocate for you right away is crucial.
Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer
The best Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer will know that psychological Injury such as anxiety, depression, PTSD, flashbacks, intrusive negative thoughts, suicidal thoughts, feelings of helplessness and insomnia are bad enough on their own.
But what our skilled Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer team wants the public and injured victims to know is that it derails the healing from other physical injuries too. Psychological injury that delays the healing from other symptoms is a double whammy that frequently occurs to innocent Vancouver MVA injury victims.
Highest Rated Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer Tips
The highest rated Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer will know to do a thorough battery of tests to get to the bottom of what the real injuries are. Missing out on having a lawyer who knows how to hire top doctors who are skilled at diagnosing and analyzing the Vancouver psychological injuries may mean the difference between a prompt or delayed recovery. MacLean Personal Injury’s Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Lawyer team know a missed diagnosis can cost a victim tens if not hundreds of thousands of lost dollars in a settlement.
Don’t follow and accident with an even bigger mistake! Contact our skilled senior personal injury lawyers right away and certainly before you speak with the highly skilled ICBC representatives.
Recent Vancouver Car Accident Psychological Injury Decision Explains The Law
 On January 21, 2011, between 8:30 and 9:00 a.m., the plaintiff, Jaime Agar, was driving her car north on Highway 5 in the City of Kamloops. She was on her way home after dropping off her teenage daughter at school.  The light was green as she drove into the controlled intersection on Highway 5 and Shuswap Road. A truck turned left in front of her and Ms. Agar applied her brakes. Despite this, her 2009 Pontiac Vibe hit the truck.  Ms. Agar was taken to Royal Inland Hospital (“RIH”) where x-rays and a CT scan were taken. Her complaints at the time were pain in her shoulders and shoulder blades, left neck, left hip, mid-back, low back, left arm and tingling in her pinky finger. It was reported from the emergency department that she experienced numbness in her left arm and left foot. She developed a throbbing headache on the left side of her head. While in the emergency room, she was seen by Dr. Faridi, a neurosurgeon, who recommended she see him within two weeks. She was then discharged from the hospital. Her sister drove her home.
 However, both Ms. Agar’s treating doctors and those who evaluated her, without exception, conclude that Ms. Agar’s physical injuries and the pain she suffers will not abate until her psychological injuries are resolved.
LAW AS TO PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURIES This is not the first time that the court has dealt with psychological factors that have overwhelmed a plaintiff’s mild physical injuries, preventing, in this case, Ms. Agar, from achieving some kind of recovery.  In Keram v. Li, 2015 BCSC 498, Justice Abrioux wrote the following:
 The principles to be applied in assessing claims of psychological injury are set out in Maslen at 133-135 and summarized in Yoshikawa v. Yu,  21 B.C.L.R. (3d) 318 at 325-326 (C.A.). They are:
the pain, discomfort, or weakness must be genuine;
the psychological problems must have their cause in the defendant’s wrongful act and not be rooted in desires for sympathy or compensation or be such that the plaintiff could be expected to overcome them through his or her inherent resources;
the psychological problems will be found to be subjective or internal if their existence or continuation stems from the plaintiff’s desire for their existence or continuation;
causation is not established unless the court can say whether the plaintiff really desired to be free of the psychological problems;
identification of the symptoms as “chronic benign pain syndrome” does not resolve the questions of legal liability or the question of assessment of damages;
it is unlikely expert opinion can resolve the ultimate questions on which these cases turn;
psychological problems will attract damages where the psychological mechanism is beyond the plaintiff’s power to control and was set in motion by the defendant’s wrongful act; and
evidence of psychological problems must be of a “convincing nature” but the plaintiff’s own evidence, if consistent with the surrounding circumstances, may suffice for the purpose.
This list is not intended to be exhaustive: Yoshikawa at 326. When determining whether or not a psychological injury has occurred, some expert medical evidence is necessary. The trier of fact should not rely only on a plaintiff’s own perception of disability:D.E. v. Unum Life Insurance Co. of America, 1999 BCCA 507 at para. 86.…
 To calculate damages owing where psychological injury is found, the Court of Appeal in Perdomo-Flores v. Gurney (1998), 49 B.C.L.R. (3d) 1 at 3 (C.A.) held:
If the plaintiff would never have suffered the problems if the accident had not occurred, or if he or she would have suffered some problems if the accident had not occurred but those problems would have been less irksome, or would have been deferred, then the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages either measured by the entire loss caused by the psychological problems if they would not have occurred at all but for the accident, or measured by the increase in the psychological problems where some psychological problems would have occurred in any event but an increase in the psychological difficulties experienced by the plaintiff, either in intensity or in time of occurrence, was brought about by the accident.
247] I have concluded, but for the headaches and the psychological problems, Ms. Agar’s physical injuries are mild. This is confirmed by the medical evidence. However, Ms. Agar believes that her physical injuries are far more serious than they are, which causes the severe headaches and pain that she suffers. It is her perception that truly causes her to be stuck in her injured state. This perception is perpetuated by the treatment she receives, none of which seems to work. When the treatment does not work, this confirms her perception of her injuries.
…Ms. Agar’s most significant problem is headaches and pain, and their seriousness is caused by her psychological problems that stubbornly remain. It is the psychological problems that differentiates Ms. Camilleri’s injuries from those of Ms. Agar.
 Given the case law provided by both the plaintiff and the defendants and all of the evidence, I award Ms. Agar $110,000.00 for non-pecuniary damages.