The appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits, which were later terminated by the insurer via an OCF-9 notice.
The appellant applied for mediation more than two years after receiving the notice, and the insurer argued the application was statute-barred.
The arbitrator agreed.
On appeal, the Director's Delegate found the arbitrator erred in law by considering extrinsic evidence rather than assessing the validity of the OCF-9 on its face.
However, upon reviewing the OCF-9, the Delegate concluded the notice was valid and sufficient to trigger the limitation period, as the disputed steps outlined in the form were permissive rather than mandatory.
The appeal was dismissed.
