MacLean Law Group Blog

Dawson Creek and Fort St John Criminal Lawyers 250-262-5052

ARE YOU CHARGED WITH A CRIMINAL OFFENCE? This is the most important thing you need to know. Call us immediately at 250-262-5052.

Saying nothing is the first thing that any lawyer will tell you when you call them on the phone from the police station.

But you need to understand why this is so important to have any shot at keeping your mouth shut. I have given the above advice to hundreds of people and only on one or two occasions did people actually listen to me, here is why:

INSTINCTS – we are full of them and to be successful here you must fight the urge to do yourself an injustice. Police officers are well trained to get you to speak. Frequently, our Charter Rights will work against the police and not allow evidence where they used tactics of oppression, threats or promises, the problem is that police rarely use those tactics because they rarely have to. People talk, this is instinctual. Get it into your head – you will talk unless you have a plan. If you don’t make a plan ahead of time you will use your instincts. The plan I suggest, is like a diet – you get to say two things and only two things – nothing else can come out of your mouth, they are your name for my example: “Joe Quiet” and the word “Lawyer.” Remember that your right is to remain silent and that you have no right to not be talked to.

Here is an example of this plan played out:

Officer: So Joe, do you mind if I call you Joe?
Joe: Joe Quiet
Officer: So Joe Quiet I hear that you drive a camaro, what year is it?
Joe: Lawyer
Officer: Joe, you know that we have someone reporting this crime but we are just collecting facts, we have their side of the story and now it’s your turn to tell us your side of the story, this is still an ongoing investigation even though you are here, you know?
Joe: Lawyer
Officer: So Joe, now that we gave you those three minutes to talk to your lawyer it’s your turn to talk to us?
Joe: Lawyer
Officer: Joe, you already spoke to your lawyer, you don’t have the right to speak with him again – lets you and I talk now, okay?
Joe: Joe Quiet
Officer: Okay Joe, I’m going to tell you what Tony Talker told us about you. He said that the two of you are good friends, is that right?
Joe: Joe Quiet
Officer: You know Tony Talker also told us that your camaro is actually his camaro and that you took it without him knowing about that?
Joe: Joe Quiet
Officer: Tony says that he told you three days ago that you weren’t supposed to take his car anymore, do you recall that conversation?
Joe: Joe Quiet
NOTE: This may continue for hours and it may be in the middle of the night!

RIGHTS – you have rights so long as you know about them and exercise them. My prime example is the Right to Counsel, yes you have this right but if you do not say that you want to speak with lawyer, than you have waived your right to one and what you say will be used against you. Did you know that only young persons, under 18 years of age, charged with criminal offences have the right in Canada to have a lawyer present while being questioned, in fact they may also have a parent or both a lawyer and parent present. Did you know that if you are an adult the moment you hang up the phone with the lawyer you will be taken into a room with a video tape and audio recording device, if this is not the case, which sometimes happens than if you say anything they will write it own in their notebook and their accuracy of notes will be believed more often than yours. Why, you may be intoxicated, not remember as clearly, you didn’t write it down did you (of course not you had no pen and paper), and ultimately your comments are always seen to be self serving. Where the officer is doing his job, he is a professional, he was not drinking and he is trained to take notes and give evidence – are you convinced yet? lets look at more…

FAIRNESS – what is fair? Knowledge is your right.
Knowing what you are charge with;
Knowing what evidence is pointing to you being the bad guy;
Knowing what a defence is and if it would be applicable given the evidence against you;
Knowing the law that you are up against;
Knowing what the penalties and the maximum jail sentence;
Knowing what the role of the various players are i.e. Police, Judges, Lawyers, Legal Aid, Experts and so on;
Knowing when you will see or speak to your lawyer again;
Knowing if you are going to be staying in jail;
Knowing that if you say yes to anything than you just gave away a right;
Knowing that there is a person in jail with you who may be working for the police;
Knowing what you have to do or say so that you don’t commit a crime by not doing or saying something; and
Knowing that what you say will be used against you, as evidence in court.
If you want fairness all you need to do is work hard at learning this lesson of staying quiet. Really what you need to do is provide your name “Joe Quiet”. and say “Lawyer” – if you say anything else you are committing an act of unfairness against your own rights. You will not be prejudiced by not saying anything, this is also your right.

Criminal Process – provides you with the right to have full answer and defence, that means that what I said above is true you have the right to knowing things before you provide your version of events. This is important because attention to detail will be necessary even for the innocent, if you happen to put yourself at the right place at the wrong time you may be linked to the crime and there may be no way back. Example: You said you were there at 3:23p.m. and that is exactly when the microwave exploded because we matched it to the internal clock stopping on the microwave. Now there is a direct link in evidence to you being there at the right time and just like the glove that didn’t fit OJ was good for him the exploding microwave at 3:23 may be bad for you even though the internal clock stopped 10 minutes after you left, not by an explosion but by a strike of lightening down the lane, that fact may not be in evidence. Re-telling a story is never perfect – so just in case keep your mouth shut.

What is even worse than saying nothing is making stuff up – in that case you might as well just say you did everything and not even ask what you are being charged with, I call this the thief who went down for murder.

You wouldn’t be very good at chess is you didn’t know how the pieces moved. This is a simple game compared to the complexities of the court system yet you may well know the ways that chess pieces can and cannot move and you likely don’t know this about your lawyer.

A lawyer is an officer of the court – that means that they cannot lie for you. If you say you did it! Then you can never have that lawyer draw out a story from you saying you didn’t do it or that you weren’t there. They can still defend you and this is often a difficult issue for people to understand – Lawyers do not judge and they cannot if they are doing their job correctly. Even if you did it you have the right to have the case against you proven in court. This is something that you choose and a lawyer must provide you with advice and analysis of your likelihood of success. Even if you are facing a case that has solid evidence on all the required elements, items that need to be proved to find you guilty, you may still proceed to court and try to exclude this evidence.

You can call us to get help toll free throughout BC at 1-877-602-9900. In the North Candice our paralegal is standing by to assist you at 250-262-5052.

Ultimately a criminal lawyer should quickly – if not immediately take charge of the interview with you. I typically will talk for about 8 minutes without you having the chance to say a word. This is for a number of reasons, one I need you to understand my role, your role and the seriousness of what comes out of your mouth. Just imagine how important it is that you say nothing to other people if even talking to your lawyer is something you should think about and understand first.

Please note this is not intended as legal advice but is meant to encourage you to understand your rights, how to exercise them and to seek legal advice always. There are exceptions to the above information and this is not intended for all purposes. For instance if you are stopped by an officer you may be required to provide your name, address and date of birth, if stopped in a motor vehicle you must also provide your licence, registration and insurance, if stopped in an impaired investigation a lawyer is required to tell you that it is an offence not to provide a roadside breath sample if demanded, however you my deserve the right to know about what this evidence will mean given the charges you are facing. Likewise, this information is not intended to be used for any purpose other than to inform you of your rights it’s now your decision to exercise your rights.

Doug Conolly welcomes ICBC claim Fort St John and Dawson Creek BC clients as well as those from Fort Nelson BC who have been personally injured in an ICBC claim or motor vehicle personal injury accident. Mr. Conolly is here to help you along with ICBC claims and personal injury paralegal Candice Pappenberger. If you have been injured it is critical you get advice immediately and particularly before you speak to an ICBC claims adjuster.

Lorne N. MacLean and Christy Clark

We are delighted to be hosting Christy Clark, Liberal leadership Candidate, at our Fort St John Law Office located at 9503 100th Avenue this coming Friday , January 7th at 9AM sharp.

Everyone is invited and new liberal members or those who want to sign up as new liberal members are welcome to attend and speak with Christy Clark on her policies that relate to the North peace.

One concern we will be raising is that the Fort St John courthouse receive much needed renovations to add additional courtrooms and additional staff and judicial officers as at present there is a serious access to justice problem for the people of the Dawson Creek and Fort St John areas.

Please come meet with Christy and support our position that better access to justice is needed for the people of the North Peace.

Call us at 250-262-5052 if you have anymore questions!

Christy Clark to Visit MacLean Law Group's Fort St John BC Office

Conolly and MacLean ICBC Personal Injury Lawyers Fort St John BC ICBC Claim Centre

It is not uncommon to hear on the Fort St John or Dawson Creek BC news or read in a Northern BC BC news paper about a Fort St John BC hit and run accident – usually with tragic consequences for a BC resident. However, not all Dawson Creek BC hit and run accidents have such tragic consequences for BC residents. In fact, hit and run type accidents are quite common- we have all been parked somewhere in BC and come out from wherever we were to find that our car or truck had been hit and damaged. In the worse case scenario, it is yourself that has been hit by someone and they have fled the scene.

What do you do if you are the victim of a BC hit and run accident? Under Section 24 of the Insurance (Motor Vehicle) Act, ICBC is required to compensate you for death or for injury or for damage to a vehicle even if the at-fault motorist is unknown. This section of the BC Insurance (Motor Vehicle) Act gives victims the right to sue ICBC directly in certain circumstances. However, there are exceptions and limitations to this right the most important of which is that the victim of a BC hit and run accident has to give proper notice to ICBC that they intend to claim under section 24 otherwise their right to sue ICBC can be taken away.

In a 2007 BC case, Mudrie v Grove, the BC plaintiff was involved in a rear-end collision. The plaintiff and the other BC driver exchanged information. Approximately one year after this BC rear-end collision the plaintiff attempted to locate the other BC driver. The results of the plaintiff’s search revealed that the other BC driver had provided misleading information as to his identity.

In the plaintiff’s BC lawsuit they named the other BC driver and ICBC as defendants. ICBC brought a motion to dismiss the BC lawsuit on the grounds that to sue under section 24 a BC litigant must provide notice to ICBC within 6 months of the BC accident and that the plaintiff failed to comply with this requirement.

Mr. Justice Saunders agreed and the BC lawsuit against ICBC was thrown out with the BC court noting as follows:

43 I conclude on the evidence that the plaintiff’s obligation to provide written notice to ICBC under s. 24(2) did not arise at the time of the accident. However, as I have found, the negative vehicle plate search results reported on June 5, 2008 must have led – quite reasonably – to the plaintiff apprehending the potential for an unidentified driver claim; otherwise, there is no explanation for the writ having been issued with pseudonymous defendants. In the words of the Supreme Court of Canada in Peixeiro, at that point, or very shortly thereafter, the plaintiff could reasonably have discovered that he had a cause of action against ICBC. I therefore find the plaintiff did have that obligation to notify ICBC as soon as reasonably practicable, within days of June 5, 2008.
44 The plaintiff argues that constructive notice of the claim was given thereafter on September 4, 2008, when ICBC was contacted to determine if it had any information regarding Mr. Grove. In my view, even if I could overlook the statutory requirement that notice be in writing, this contact was nowhere close to being sufficient to discharge the plaintiff’s obligation. There is no evidence of any indication having been given to ICBC that an unidentified driver claim might be pursued.
45 The only notice, written or otherwise, given ICBC in this case was the writ and statement of claim. I see nothing in the statute which precludes the pleadings themselves serving as the required notice under ss. 24(2). The purpose of the notice provision is to provide ICBC with sufficient opportunity to make its own investigation of the other driver’s or owner’s identity: Stelmock v. I.C.B.C. (1982), 42 B.C.L.R. 145 (S.C.) at para. 10; Goltzman v. McKenzie (1989), 36 B.C.L.R. (2d) 228 (C.A.). Successful identification of the driver or owner will lead to a tort claim, relieving ICBC from direct liability. If those persons are insured by ICBC, it may eventually have to make an indemnity payment on its assureds’ behalf, but may possibly then have the potential of recouping some of its loss through adjustments to those assureds’ future premiums. In the case of an out-of-province driver, ICBC may of course avoid liability altogether. Given the potential for fraud in cases of alleged hit-and-run accidents, notice to ICBC will also enable it to investigate the circumstances of the reported accident to determine if the plaintiff’s claim has merit: Epp v. Harden Estate (1988), 24 B.C.L.R. (2d) 89, 31 C.C.L.I. 229 (B.C.S.C.). These legislative purposes may be fulfilled through ICBC receiving details of an accident through a writ, as opposed to discrete advance notification that a claim will be made. And in my view the writ with its attached statement of claim, in the present case, disclosed sufficient detail that service on ICBC alone would have met the notice requirement, if it had been done in a timely manner.
46 This brings us to the real question in this case: whether ICBC received notification of the claim, through the writ, within the time parameters given in the statute. The writ was not served until April 2009, ten months after the negative vehicle plate search. No explanation for this delay has been offered.
47 In respect of interpreting the notice requirement, the plaintiff argues that the legislative purpose behind the requirement is the same as that which lies behind the two-month notice requirement to municipalities under s. 286 of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 323: the prevention of prejudice to the defence of a government body. It is argued that this court should direct its inquiry into whether ICBC has been prejudiced by the late notification; the logic of that argument is that ICBC cannot be presumed to have been prejudiced, when the trail left by “Mr. Grove” would already have gone cold by the time the plaintiff ought to have realized this was an unidentified driver case. The notice provisions of the two statutes are, however, entirely different. Under the Local Government Act, there is a blanket requirement that notice of claims falling within the ambit of s. 286 be delivered within two months, but subsection (3) specifically provides that the failure to give notice, or sufficient notice, is not a bar to maintaining an action if the court believes (a) there was reasonable excuse, and (b) the municipality has suffered no prejudice. In contrast, under the Insurance (Vehicle) Act’s s. 24, the obligation is to give notice as soon as reasonably practicable, and in any event – meaning, whether reasonably practicable or not – within six months.
48 If the prevention of prejudice could be said to be the dominant purpose of the notice requirement, it would appear that the legislature has either deemed there to be prejudice after six months has elapsed, or has otherwise determined, as a matter of policy, that ICBC’s exposure to such claims ought to be capped at that point. To subject that provision to an overarching, implied test involving the finding of real prejudice would be tantamount to rewriting the statute. The most that could be said is that a consideration of prejudice might, in certain circumstances, be implied by the qualifier “reasonably”. But even so, that cannot assist the plaintiff in the present case, when notice was not given to ICBC until long after the six-month period had lapsed.
VIII. Conclusion
49 ICBC was not notified of this claim within six months of when the plaintiff could reasonably have discovered that he had a cause of action against ICBC. The claim against ICBC is therefore dismissed. The parties are at liberty to make written submissions as to costs.

In addition to providing early reporting to ICBC about a hit-and-run accident, you actually have to take steps to determine the identity of the at-fault BC motorist and the BC vehicle involved in the accident.

Section 24 (5) provides that:
(5) In an action against the corporation as nominal defendant, a judgment against the corporation must not be given unless the court is satisfied that:
(a) all reasonable efforts have been made by the parties to ascertain the identity of the unknown owner and driver or unknown driver, as the case may be, and
(b) the identity of those persons or that person, as the case may be, is not ascertainable.

At a very minimum you must take the following steps to protect your British Columbia hit and run claim from being dismissed:

1. Place a sign at the accident scene looking for witnesses.
2. Place an advertisement in the local newspaper looking for witnesses.
3. Notify the police within hours of the accident, if possible.
4. Notify ICBC within hours of the accident, if possible; and
5. If the accident occurred nearby to some buildings, knock on some doors to see if there are any witnesses.

In other words, to prevent ICBC from attempting to have your case dismissed you need to be able to prove that you have in an attempt to identify the BC driver and BC vehicle involved in the BC accident.

DOUG CONOLLY AND LORNE MACLEAN FORT ST JOHN ICBC PERSONAL INJURY SETTLEMENT LAWYERS

Call us at 1-250-262-5052 to set up a free initial consultation to develop a proper strategy and to avoid key mistakes.

FORT ST JOHN ICBC PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS LAWYERS CONOLLY AND MACLEAN

If you are injured in Fort St John BC, Dawson Creek BC or any of the surrounding areas get prompt medical attention then call us to set up a free initial consultation to let us prepare for you a proper plan to ensure you receive what is fairly due to you.

Check out our free ICBC and Personal Injury Claims website at www.macleanlawgroup.com and call us at 250-262-5052.

MacLean Law Group

Perhaps the most common ICBC INJURY CLAIM injury our lawyers at our Ft St John BC office see associated with a BC automobile
crash is neck and back injury including whiplash. Most typically this is as a result of an ICBC INJURY CLAIM rear-end collision. However, whiplash and back and neck injuries result from more
than just a rear-end shunt. In fact, it is not uncommon for individuals who have been in a personal injury crash on BC roadways to suffer some form of
back or neck trauma. This fact makes it extremely important to your BC personal injury case to have your ICBC INJURY CLAIM back and neck injuries including whiplash assessed as quickly as possible. The sooner it is diagnosed and on the record the harder it is for ICBC or any BC insurance company to tell you that your injury is only minor.

In Schmidt v Hawkins the Plaintiff suffered soft tissue injuries that affected her neck and back. Although not rear-ended in this BC accident, the
Plaintiff was T-boned at highway speed. The Defendant admitted fault thus focusing the trial on the merits of the Plaintiff’s claim for compensation.

At trial Madam Justice Hyslop made the following ruling based on the impact that the BC accident had on the Plaintiff’s quality of life:

[96] At the time of trial, Mrs. Schmidt was age 39. The accident resulted in
causing injuries to Mrs. Schmidt leaving her with a stiff and painful neck,
pain in her upper back and, in particular, between the shoulder blades and
headaches.
[97] Mrs. Schmidt believes that her condition was not getting any better
causing Mrs. Schmidt to have some minor depression.
[98] It impacted her social life and some of her activities. At trial, for
the most part, she was back to her regular activities.
[99] As a result of her injuries, she required some assistance from family
members and neighbours to meet some of her household and gardening
responsibilities…
[141] I assess Mrs. Schmidt’s non-pecuniary damages at $45,000.00.

It is important to note that although this BC motor vehicle accident occurred at highway speed, not all back and neck injuries suffered by BC
motorists happen at these speeds. In fact, many BC motorists involved in accidents resulting in back and neck injuries occur in what ICBC refers to
as Low Velocity Impacts (LVI). In Mendoza-Flores v. Haigh, ICBC tried toargue that the Plaintiff could not have suffered any back or neck injury
because in this BC car crash the colliding vehicle was not moving fast enough in order to cause injury. However, as Harvey J. made clear “the
relationship between the damage to the two vehicles and the resultant claim for injuries suffered by one of the occupants, it is trite law that the fact
that the damage to the plaintiff’s vehicle was minor does not lead to a conclusion that the resultant injuries are also minor.”

The Honourable Mr. Justice Harvey and the BC court went on the award the BC Plaintiff in this case damages for her injuries and loss including $40,000
for her non-pecuniary damages. Mr. Justice Harvey went on to state that the Plaintiff had experience moderate soft tissue injury that continued to cause
her both discomfort and a problem for her in her ability to perform her job.

It is important that your BC personal injury lawyer make the best possible case for you whether your soft tissue injury is a result of a at highway
speed collision or a parking lot LVI.

Come see the personal injury lawyers at the MacLean Law Group to help youput your best foot forward to recovery.

Written by James Macdonnell

The ICBC CLAIM AND PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS AT the Fort St John law offices of MacLean Law Group want to educate injured ICBC car crash claims victims about various types of injuries they may have suffered including THORACIC OUTLET SYNDROME to ensure they receive the full amount of compensation for them.

It is not just about the money- it is about justice- then the money.

A common injury suffered in car crash and other vehicular accidents results from the seatbelt strap causing injury by pressing violently on the chest in a car crash. This injury is called Thoracic Outlet Syndrome. What are the symptoms so you know if you suffered this injury?

Thoracic Outlet Syndrome At A Glance

Thoracic outlet syndrome is a condition whereby symptoms are produced from compression of nerves or blood vessels, or both, because of an inadequate passageway through an area (thoracic outlet) between the base of the neck and the armpit.
Symptoms include neck, shoulder, and arm pain, numbness, or impaired circulation to the extremities (causing discoloration).
Diagnosis of thoracic outlet syndrome is suggested by the symptoms and physical findings and is sometimes supported by electrical and/or radiology tests.
Treatment of thoracic outlet syndrome usually involves physical-therapy exercises and avoiding certain prolonged positions of the shoulder.

Call us at 250-262-5052 or toll free at 1-877-602-9900 for a free initial consultation to get peace of mind. Doug Conolly leads our ICBC claims and personal injury department and looks forward to talking with you.

Call us or go to our website to get more information by clicking here

Shawna Specht handled two recent high profile local legal disputes involving BC Oil and Gas Surface Lease Negotiation and pointed out serious flaws in the existing legislation that led in part to big changes being made that will better protect landowners and other parties involved in BC Oil and Gas Surface Lease Negotiation and Mediation and Arbitration. These changes are summarized in an excellent article by the local media at Energeticcity.ca.

New bill proposes change to Oil and Gas Activities Act
Monday, March 29, 2010
By Energeticcity.ca staff

B.C.’s Energy Minister introduced the Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources Statutes Amendment Act in the legislature on Monday.
Blair Lekstrom says that if approved, the act will provide greater certainty for industry, improve environmental protection, and make dispute resolution more balanced and effective for landowners and industry.
The proposed bill comes on the heels of B.C. Auditor General John Doyle’s report on the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission.
In a nut shell, his report concludes that the OGC isn’t doing a good enough job in its oversight of restoring contaminated well sites in the northeast.
The report included numerous recommendations to the OGC, and at the time, Blair Lekstrom insisted the new act will give the OGC more power to enforce the suggested changes.
Below is a brief overview of the amended Act:

- The OGC will have expanded powers to use money from the Orphan Site Reclamation Fund to clean up sites where no oil and gas owner can be held accountable.
- The OGC will have a broader authority to collect fees and levies that support it in regulating the industry.
- The Province will have the authority to set environmental objectives for the OGC to incorporate into their permitting decisions.
- Amendments regarding approvals for pipeline crossings of roads will better accommodate community interests and government transportation objectives.

The act also includes amendments to the Petroleum and Natural Gas Act, which include:

- The Mediation and Arbitration Board will be renamed the Surface Rights Board, to clarify the board’s purpose.
- Landowners will now have the right to request mediation in surface access disputes.
- Neighbours and tenants will now have the right to request mediation for claims related to damage caused by an oil and gas activity.
- The board will have authority to deal with disputes over the operation of a surface lease.
- The board will have expanded authority to award costs.

Lorne MacLean discusses impact of Site C dam on the property of long time local farmer

Shawna Specht, our BC oil and gas surface lease lawyer, provides this link  from the BC Provincial Government website for landowners involved with oil and gas surface lease issues so you can better understand the oil and gas surface lease process.

What are the landowner’s rights in this process?

Landowners are required to negotiate their own surface access agreements. A surface lease agreement sets the amount of compensation a landowner may receive for disturbance to the property, as well as establishes other special restrictions concerning facility location or operating practices, including:

• fair compensation for surface access to a well site and related access roads;
• facility locations, such as a battery; and
• any mutually agreed upon restrictions on activities (e.g. negotiating a drilling schedule).

A standard Surface Lease document can be found at http://www.em.gov.bc.ca/Subwebs/landsale/InfoLetters/petitles/emd97-17.htm.

To further help landowners understand oil and gas regulation and development, the Ministry has developed the Oil and Gas Development and You booklet (PDF 4.36MB) located at www.landownernotification.gov.bc.ca.

The Oil and Gas Commission has also developed a Landowner’s Information Guide located at: https://www.ogc.gov.bc.ca/documents/forms/communications/ogc_lom.pdf (PDF 3.85MB).