Silken Joseph v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2013 ONFSCDRS 90

Financial Services Commission des

Commission services financiers

of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2013 ONFSCDRS 90

FSCO A12-004119

BETWEEN:

SILKEN JOSEPH

Applicant

and

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE

INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurer

DECISION ON A MOTION

Before: Judith Killoran

Heard: By telephone conference call on May 21, 2013

Appearances: David Carranza for Ms. Joseph

Michael P. Taylor for State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Issues:

The Applicant, Silken Joseph, was involved in a motor vehicle accident on September 3, 2010. She applied for statutory accident benefits from State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), payable under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation, and Ms. Joseph applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.

The preliminary issue is:

Should Mr. David Carranza and his firm, ICS Legal Services Professional Corporation, be permitted to withdraw as representatives for Ms. Joseph?

Result:

Mr. Carranza and his firm, ICS Legal Services Professional Corporation, are permitted to withdraw as representatives for Ms. Joseph.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

A pre-hearing in this matter was scheduled for May 21, 2013. Prior to the pre-hearing, Mr. Carranza filed motion materials requesting that he and his firm, ICS Legal Services Professional Corporation, be permitted to withdraw as representatives for Ms. Joseph, pursuant to Rule 9.7 of the Dispute Resolution Practice. On May 21, 2013, Mr. Carranza made submissions to support his motion. State Farm took no position with respect to Mr. Carranza’s motion.

Mr. Carranza submitted that he could no longer represent Ms. Joseph because there had been a breakdown of communication. I find that Mr. Carranza complied with the requirements of Rule 9.7 by providing a written request for withdrawal, with reasons, to the Dispute Resolution Group and the parties together with the last known contact information for Ms. Joseph. I also find that adequate notice was given to Ms. Joseph of the motion for withdrawal.

Although I have not received written consent to Mr. Carranza’s request for withdrawal from Ms. Joseph, I find that the requirements of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code have been met and no terms need be imposed. Consequently, I order that Mr. Carranza and his firm, ICS Legal Services Professional Corporation, shall be removed as solicitors of record for Ms. Joseph. I issued an oral decision on May 21, 2013 with reasons to follow.

Ms. Joseph did not appear at the pre-hearing which was scheduled on May 21, 2013.

Consequently, the Case Administrator in this file will confer with the parties to set a new date for a pre-hearing.

July 8, 2013

Judith Killoran

Arbitrator

Date