A Metro Vancouver woman who tripped and fell in a crosswalk won't get the thousands of dollars for injuries she claimed in B.C. court.
Jacqueline Lewis was asking for $5,000 in pain and suffering damages and $80 for physiotherapy expenses after she tripped "over a hole" in a Surrey crosswalk on March 5, 2022, according to a B.C. small claims tribunal decision posted March 7.
Lewis was walking from west to east in the crosswalk on the north side of the intersection at 152nd Street at 16th Avenue when she tripped, causing her to "stumble to the other side of the road, where she ultimately fell and suffered injuries."
The City of Surrey is responsible for maintaining the streets but said Lewis failed to prove it was liable for her injuries.
The Civil Resolution Tribunal's maximum small claim amount is $5,000, so Lewis would not have been able to receive the additional $80 she was claiming. However, her full claim was dismissed.
City not responsible for Metro Vancouver woman's fall
Tribunal member Alison Wake said Lewis was alleging the city acting negligently by failing to maintain its street. But the city relies on staff and citizens to report issues on its thoroughfares, because "it is not able to carry out recurring scheduled inspections of its roads due to budget restraints."
Wake went on to say that Lewis didn't provide evidence that the city's policy decision was "irrational, unreasonable, or otherwise made in bad faith." She also referenced a ruling of an individual, Oser versus the City of Nelson, where the courts ruled that the city was not ignoring a dangerous situation by using a complaints-based policy.
Even if the city had received a service request about the intersection where Lewis fell, it said it wouldn't have repaired the crosswalk.
While there were some "marks and depressions," they were considered "reasonable and standard deviations" that don't warrant repair.
Lewis provided a photograph that shows a small hole in the pavement but Wake found it was "insufficient to conclude that the city obviously breached a reasonable standard of care for road maintenance."
