Owners of Winnipeg dog hit and killed by car headed to court over MPI bill

Going to court over MPI bill for dog killed by car Josh Crabb on a couple going to court over a bill from MPI after their dog was hit and killed by a car.

The case of a Winnipeg couple facing a $2,500 bill from Manitoba Public Insurance after their dog was hit and killed by a car is headed to small claims court.

The dog, which belongs to Anastasia and Kris Rzesnoski, was staying with Kris’ dad Terry Rzesnoski in East St. Paul.

Anastasia and Kris were getting set to celebrate their Labrador retriever’s first birthday on Feb. 26, 2015 when the collision happened.

The dog was named Bobby Orr, after the famous NHL defenceman who is one of Kris’ favourite hockey players.

Terry said he was outside with the dog for 45 minutes before he went into his house. He was grabbing some food to get ready for the birthday celebration while Bobby played with another dog in the neighbour’s yard. Bobby wasn’t on a leash.

When Terry was inside, Bobby ran onto Hoddinot Road and got hit by a car. The dog died shortly after being struck.

“He was my fur baby. He was my everything,” Anastasia said. “It has been a bit of a roller coaster.”

The driver stopped and exchanged information with Terry.

In April 2015, Terry got a letter from Manitoba Public Insurance notifying him he was responsible for paying $2,536.97 for damages the insured vehicle sustained during the collision with the dog.

The letter said MPI is seeking damages based on a section of the province’s Animal Liability Act, which stated the owner of an animal is responsible for any damages resulting from harm caused to a person or property.

“It just seems surreal they would actually do that,” Anastasia said during an interview from Vancouver. “It has been tough.”

“I didn’t even think something like that… they can come after us.”

Initially, the Rzesnoski’s thought the claim from MPI was a mistake, because the letter stated the incident happened in Winnipegosis, Man.

“We couldn’t understand what was happening,” Anastasia said.

With the bill not paid nearly two years after the incident, the couple received a letter that said MPI would be taking the case to small claims court.

The family plans to appear in court to dispute the claim.

Anastasia said she and her husband don’t deny they are responsible for the dog. Anastasia said the reason they’re headed to court is to dispute how MPI handled the matter. She said getting correspondence with the wrong information only aggravated an already difficult situation for the family.

“It was just a cold-hearted letter,” Anastasia said.

For privacy reasons and because the matter is before the courts, MPI said it can’t comment on the specifics of the case.

A spokesperson for Manitoba Public Insurance said the insurer has “the legal obligation to pursue such costs on behalf of our ratepayers, in efforts to keep rates among the lowest in Canada.”

Such cases are not uncommon, MPI said.

MPI said people have the option of opening a claim with their home insurer to handle the costs.

Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI) told CTV News claims of this kind could happen in Saskatchewan too, but are rare. An SGI spokesperson said if an animal causes damage to property or a vehicle, the owners can be held responsible. However, in most collisions involving animals, SGI said it’s unable to identify the owners of the animal.

A spokesperson for the public insurer in British Columbia said in a crash involving a dog near or on a roadway, ICBC does not typically seek recovery from a dog owner.

The spokesperson said a driver may pursue the owner of the dog for reimbursement of their insurance deductible amount, but that’s up to the driver to prove negligence against the dog owner to recover the costs in court.