Richard Feldman

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After failing to attend two pre-hearing conferences and the scheduled arbitration hearing, the applicant's counsel was permitted to withdraw from the proceeding.

As no one appeared on behalf of the applicant to tender evidence, the arbitrator dismissed the claims for non-earner and medical benefits.

The applicant was ordered to pay $1,500 for the insurer's arbitration expenses.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including medical benefits and income replacement benefits (IRBs).

The insurer denied the claims on the basis that the applicant's impairments fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and that he did not meet the disability test for IRBs.

The arbitrator dismissed all of the applicant's claims, finding significant credibility issues due to inconsistent reporting of pre-accident medical history, post-accident employment, and income.

The arbitrator concluded that the applicant's impairments were predominantly minor injuries and that he failed to prove a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident employment, noting that he had worked in physically demanding jobs post-accident.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

During the pre-hearing conference stage, the applicant passed away.

The trustee of the applicant's estate requested that the arbitration proceedings be discontinued.

The insurer consented to a dismissal on a without costs basis.

The arbitrator dismissed the application on consent.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After disputes arose, she applied for arbitration but subsequently failed to communicate with her legal representatives or participate in the proceedings.

Her representatives were permitted to withdraw.

The insurer brought a motion to dismiss the application under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's failure to participate rendered the proceeding frivolous or vexatious and dismissed the application.

The applicant claimed statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After failing to attend a pre-hearing discussion and failing to communicate with her paralegal, the paralegal was permitted to withdraw.

The insurer moved to dismiss the application under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had manifested no interest in pursuing her claims and dismissed the application as frivolous or vexatious.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After the applicant's legal counsel withdrew due to an inability to communicate with the applicant, the insurer requested that the application be dismissed pursuant to Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The applicant subsequently contacted the insurer and the parties agreed to a dismissal of the application on a without costs basis.

The arbitrator dismissed the application on consent.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After disputes arose, the applicant applied for arbitration but subsequently failed to attend a pre-hearing discussion or a motion by his counsel to be removed from the record.

The applicant also failed to respond to the arbitrator's notices.

The insurer brought a motion to dismiss the application under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator found that the proceeding had become frivolous or vexatious due to the applicant's failure to participate and dismissed the application, awarding $1,000 in expenses to the insurer.

The applicant claimed statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident and applied for arbitration when disputes arose with the insurer.

The applicant failed to communicate with his legal representatives for over a year and did not attend the arbitration hearing.

The applicant's counsel requested an adjournment, which was denied as there was no reasonable prospect of locating the applicant.

The arbitrator dismissed the application on a without costs basis due to abandonment.

The Insurer raised a preliminary issue that the Applicant was statute-barred from claiming housekeeping and home maintenance benefits, while the Applicant brought a motion for interim income replacement benefits.

The Arbitrator found that the Insurer's refusal to pay housekeeping benefits was clear and unequivocal, triggering the two-year limitation period under s. 281.1(1) of the Insurance Act, which the Applicant missed.

On the motion for interim benefits, the Arbitrator held that despite the Insurer's breach of s. 37 of the SABS in terminating income replacement benefits, interim benefits are a discretionary remedy.

Given the Applicant's unexplained five-year delay in challenging the termination and lack of evidence of urgent financial need, the motion for interim benefits was dismissed.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After mediation failed, the applicant applied for arbitration.

The applicant and her counsel failed to attend the pre-hearing conference and subsequently failed to respond to the arbitrator's directions or communicate an intention to pursue the claim.

The insurer moved to dismiss the application.

The arbitrator found that the applicant manifested no interest in pursuing the claims and dismissed the application as frivolous or vexatious under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

Following the dismissal of the applicant's claims in an arbitration proceeding, the insurer sought its expenses.

The arbitrator found the insurer was completely successful and entitled to its expenses.

The insurer claimed $16,587.10, but the arbitrator found the hours claimed excessive for a simple two-day hearing with only two witnesses.

Applying Legal Aid rates and a 1:1 preparation-to-hearing ratio, the arbitrator fixed the insurer's expenses at $5,300.00, inclusive of fees, disbursements, and taxes.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while driving a tractor trailer and sustained a catastrophic impairment.

He sought various statutory accident benefits, including caregiver, income replacement, housekeeping, attendant care, and medical benefits.

The arbitrator dismissed the majority of the claims, citing significant credibility issues, surveillance evidence showing the applicant performing demanding physical activities, and a failure to provide documentation regarding post-accident employment and income.

The insurer was ordered to pay for one specific treatment plan at the catastrophic impairment rate, but the claim for a special award was denied.

The applicant brought a motion to remove the insurer's counsel as solicitor of record, alleging a conflict of interest because the same law firm represented the insurer in two separate accident benefits arbitrations involving the applicant.

The arbitrator dismissed the motion, finding no evidence of a conflict of interest or abuse of process, as both claims were for accident benefits and the duty owed by the insurer to the applicant was the same in both claims.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After mediation failed, the applicant applied for arbitration.

Subsequently, the applicant's counsel lost contact with the applicant and attempted to withdraw from the record, but failed to comply with the procedural rules.

Neither the applicant nor her counsel attended the pre-hearing conference or responded to the arbitrator's notice of intent to dismiss.

The arbitrator found the application had been abandoned and dismissed it as frivolous or vexatious under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The insurer was awarded $1,000 in expenses.

The Insurer sought expenses following its complete success in an arbitration proceeding where the Applicant's claims were dismissed.

The Applicant objected to the Insurer's disclosure of settlement negotiations regarding the expense issue.

The Arbitrator found the disclosure inappropriate but did not penalize the Insurer by denying expenses entirely.

Applying the Expense Regulation, the Arbitrator reduced the claimed fees and disbursements due to lack of supporting documentation and fixed the Insurer's expenses at $12,000.00.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits, including caregiver, attendant care, housekeeping, and medical benefits, following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer terminated these benefits after approximately one year based on insurer examinations finding no objective evidence of impairment.

The arbitrator dismissed all of the applicant's claims, finding the applicant lacked credibility due to his failure to disclose a significant pre-accident history of chronic pain to his assessors and his family doctor.

The arbitrator gave little weight to the applicant's medical expert, whose opinion relied entirely on the applicant's subjective and unreliable history.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After his legal representatives removed themselves from the record, the applicant failed to participate in a pre-hearing discussion and did not attend the scheduled arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator proceeded in the applicant's absence and dismissed the claims, as the applicant failed to present evidence to prove his entitlement.

The insurer was awarded $2,500 in expenses due to its complete success and the applicant's apparent abandonment of the proceeding.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The parties were unable to resolve their disputes, and the applicant applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing.

As the applicant did not present any evidence, she failed to prove her entitlement to the claimed benefits, and her claims were dismissed.

The arbitrator awarded the insurer its expenses of the proceeding, fixed at $3,500, noting the applicant's apparent abandonment of the arbitration and the insurer's complete success.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

At the scheduled arbitration hearing, the parties jointly requested that the proceeding be dismissed on a without costs basis.

The arbitrator granted the request and dismissed the application without expenses.

The applicant, who was four years old at the time of a 1996 motor vehicle accident, sought Loss of Earning Capacity Benefits (LECBs) under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The insurer argued that section 20.1 of the Schedule, introduced in 2006, barred the claim because the applicant had not met the prerequisite conditions before March 1, 2006.

The applicant argued that section 20.1 was merely procedural or, alternatively, that it violated his section 15 Charter rights by discriminating on the basis of age, as he was too young to have met the prerequisites.

The arbitrator held that section 20.1 substantively eliminated the right to LECBs for those who did not meet the conditions and found no Charter violation, concluding that the provision's effect was based on the circumstances existing as of February 28, 2006, rather than age, and did not perpetuate prejudice or stereotyping.