MPI still lacking brain injury expert

Manitoba Public Insurance has failed to hire an independent brain injury expert to probe how personal injury claims are handled, nearly two years after it was recommended.

Several speakers shared their stories about experiences with MPI in relation to brain injury claims on the opening day of the Public Utilities Board hearing into the auto insurer’s general rate application for a 2.38 per cent increase.

Jean-Marc Christophe said he had a concussion after a collision in September 2025. He said he’s had little help from the Crown corporation and it has left him confused and frustrated.

“Before the collision, I worked about 55 to 60 hours a week, worked every day as a courier. I delivered groceries,” he told the board Tuesday. “Trying to navigate this has been very difficult. I don’t have anybody to help me. I have to do it on my own.”

Christophe said MPI had assigned him a psychologist who diagnosed him and tried to use psychological treatment to cure his concussion.

He was handed off to a clinician from the Cognitive Behavior Therapy Institute Of Manitoba who he saidhelped no more than other ‘experts.’ Christophe said loud noises in his apartment building exacerbated his concussion.

“(The clinician) was telling me to get over sound — a sound sensitivity that I had that was debilitating. So, basically, she said to put earplugs in and — and get over it. And that’s not how it works, not how it works at all,” he told the board.

In January 2025 in its ruling on MPI’s 2025-26 rate application, the regulator told the province to appoint an external expert on brain injuries after several witnesses said the Crown insurer had handled personal injury claims poorly.

While the current process includes examination by medical professionals and an independent arbitration process, the board wrote that it heard from witnesses who said the process is slanted in a manner that makes it “virtually impossible” for claimants to receive adequate treatment and compensation.

On Tuesday, the board’s lawyers asked MPI where it was at with respect to reviewing its processes.

Chief claims officer John Bowering said MPI was working on it.

Bowering admitted MPI had issued a request for proposal to undertake a review, which had yielded no submissions.

In its rate application, MPI said that as a result of the 2025 recommendation, it had formed a working group and requested help from the Ontario Brain Injury Association, as suggested in the recommendation, but the organization showed no interest. The document said the limited response may be attributable to specialized expertise of traumatic brain injuries and an understanding of no-fault insurance practices that is not “commonly available.”

Last year, the board directed MPI to update it on its report. MPI said it would have the update ready by this month’s hearings.

Bowering said Tuesday MPI eventually secured a firm and a report is expected in November.

Others who presented to the panel questioned whether the review’s scope addresses the concerns.

Monique Curci, an MPI claimant and founder of the advocacy group Manitobans for MPI Accountability, said the review must examine the claims process and its administration.

“Appropriate insurance cannot be separated from the process an injured person must navigate to receive it. Brain injury may affect memory, attention, comprehension, organization, emotional regulation, communication, vision, fatigue, and processing speed. The claim process often demands those same abilities through technical correspondence, deadlines, forms, records, and challenges to decisions,” she said.

The highest number of brain injury claims in the last 10 years was recorded in fiscal 2025-26, when there were 3o6 brain damage claims, up from 236 claims in 2024-25 and 172 in 2023-24.

John McKernan told the board about his friend Barry Waito on Tuesday. Waito had testified about his experience with MPI in relation to his brain injury, at the PUB two years ago during MPI’s 2025-26 rate application. Waito died in March at age 69.

McKernan said Waito dealt with conflicting medical reviews, a lack of transparency about the credentials of those who reviewed his case and was repeatedly denied additional payments.

“He told you that he and his wife heard nothing from MPI until they themselves called four months after a loaded semi-trailer slammed into the back of their stopped car, driving it into a parked loaded vehicle in front of them. He told you that MPI’s anonymous reviewers used a sports guideline to call his brain injury whiplash,” McKernan said.

“He lived about 3,500 days after that crash, and much of it was with systemic dysfunction, impairment of his marriage, his business, and certainly his well-being.”

McKernan called for the claims process to be more transparent and said past claims should be reopened if new medical reports are brought forward.

Matt Wiebe, the minister responsible for MPI, released a statement late Wednesday that said the government recognizes the importance of supporting people who have been injured.

“What we heard was bringing in an expert would support those Manitobans in need, so we took action. MPI is currently undergoing an independent review that will result in recommendations on how that expertise and guidance can be implemented, and we are committed to working with them to make sure the needs of Manitobans are met.”

nicole.buffie@winnipegfreepress.com