04/29/2014 06:19 EDT | Updated 06/29/2014 05:59 EDT

Widow says she can't get compensation from government insurance after car crash

REGINA - A Regina woman whose husband died in an "awful" car crash says Saskatchewan Government Insurance won't compensate her because a drunk-driving charge against the man responsible for the collision was stayed.

Rosmarie Boxall says she believes she's entitled to $60,000 under the Fatal Accidents Act and each of her three stepdaughters should get $30,000.

Boxall says she's been trying to get compensation from SGI since her husband, John, was killed in February 2013.

"It's a nightmare. You just can't get it out of your mind. You're just always reminded of it and over and over," Boxall said Tuesday at the legislature.

John Boxall's vehicle was hit by a stolen pickup truck speeding through an intersection. The 68-year-old died at the scene.

Jordan Thomas Lee McNabb pleaded guilty to four charges, including criminal negligence causing death, but a charge of impaired driving causing death was stayed. Last December, McNabb was sentenced to 10 years in jail, although he got one-year credit for time already served.

But Rosmarie Boxall says SGI has told her that she's "out of luck" and can't get compensation because there was no impaired driving conviction — even though court heard McNabb was drunk.

"And even with the trial and that you go through all this stuff, you have to do everything to help them convict the guy and everything, then you basically are left out hanging on a limb. It was torture going through the trial and all that stuff, too. It's just crazy," she said.

Boxall says she's not desperate for the money, but is fighting for the principle now.

Donna Harpauer, the minister responsible for SGI, suggests her hands are tied in the case because of the legislation.

"My advisers are (saying) that it is very prescriptive, that it's not discretionary, so that's my legal ad visors," Harpauer said Tuesday.

However, the minister says she wants a review of injury coverage.

"I think that if there is a case where there is no question that there was drinking and driving and someone else gets injured, in this particular case it was a fatal accident, then I think they should have coverage in the same manner where someone was charged," said Harpauer.