When a child or adult suffers a severe traumatic brain injury or
spinal cord injury, the costs for care into the future are
significant. Failure to adequately address the needs of a severely
disabled client through medical evidence and a solid life care plan
can have a disastrous impact on the case. Since the needs are for a
lifetime, many items equate to high figures.
Traditionally, the insurer and defence counsel have contested
the care costs items on the basis that the specific item being
sought is either not needed to the extent asserted, is
unreasonable, or the market rates are much lower. These legitimate
arguments have controlled unreasonable and exaggerated wish lists
when presented by overzealous life care planners. On occasion,
however, the insurer will go beyond these legitimate arguments and
seek to reduce their exposure by relying on social welfare
programs. In other words, the life care planner simply asserts in
their report that the item should not be
