Dr. Lorne Sokol

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident but failed to appear at the arbitration hearing.

His claims for income replacement, medical, and rehabilitation benefits were dismissed for lack of evidence.

The insurer sought an award under section 282(11.2) of the Insurance Act, alleging the claim was fraudulent and an abuse of process.

The arbitrator dismissed this request, finding the insurer failed to prove fraud from the outset on a balance of probabilities, as required to trigger the section.

However, the arbitrator awarded the insurer $4,776.02 in expenses under the Expense Regulation, as the applicant's failure to appear rendered his claims manifestly unfounded.

The applicant sought ongoing weekly income benefits and medical and rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer terminated benefits and sought repayment, alleging the applicant was involved in an insurance fraud scheme and had misrepresented his pre-accident and post-accident employment.

The arbitrator found the applicant entirely unreliable, noting he had pleaded guilty to fraud in relation to false employment confirmation forms.

The arbitrator concluded the applicant sustained only minor soft tissue injuries, was not disabled, and had been actively employed in auto body shops during the benefit period.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to repay $27,600 in benefits obtained by fraud, plus interest, and to pay the insurer's $2,000 arbitration assessment.

The appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received weekly income benefits until they were terminated by the insurer.

An arbitrator upheld the termination, finding the appellant was substantially able to perform the essential tasks of his employment as a band saw operator.

On appeal, the appellant argued the arbitrator erred in her assessment of the medical evidence and credibility.

The Director of Arbitrations dismissed the appeal, holding that the arbitrator's findings of fact and credibility were supported by the evidence and that it is not the appellate function to re-weigh evidence absent a palpable error.