Financial Services Commission des Commission services financiers of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2014 ONFSCDRS 194

FSCO A13-009536 FSCO A13-009538

BETWEEN:

JACKSON POLIFILS and JEAN VAGUEL LOUIS Applicants

and

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY Insurer

Before: Robert Bujold

Heard: October 24, 2014, at the offices of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario in Toronto

Appearances: No appeared for Mr. Polifils No appeared for Mr. Louis Christopher Schnarr for State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Issues:

The Applicants, Jackson Polifils and Jean Vaguel Louis, claimed to have been injured in a motor vehicle accident on March 6, 2011. They applied for statutory accident benefits from State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), payable under the Schedule.¹ Issues arose regarding the Applicants’ entitlement to certain benefits. The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation, and each Applicant applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.

The issues in this hearing are:

Should the Applicants’ claims be dismissed?

Result:

The Applicants’ claims are dismissed.
The Applicants shall each pay $500.00 toward State Farm’s expenses of the arbitration.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

Background:

The Applicants failed to attend a pre-hearing discussion held on July 21, 2014, although each was properly served with a Notice of Pre-Hearing Discussion at his last known address. Global Accident Legal Services Professional Corporation (“Global”) brought a motion, returnable on the same date, for an Order permitting the firm to withdraw as the Applicants’ representative. The pre-hearing discussion and Global’s motion were put over to September 19, 2014. On that date, the Applicants again failed to attend. I was satisfied that Global had met the requirements of Rule 9 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, and I found that there had been a serious breakdown in the representative-client relationship in respect of both Mr. Polifils and Mr. Louis. As a result, I permitted Global to withdraw as the Applicants’ representative.

The pre-hearing discussion then proceeded in the Applicants’ absence. The issues were identified as the issues set out in both Applications for Arbitration, and a hearing date in both matters was scheduled for October 24, 2014 at 11:00 a.m.

A Notice of Hearing dated September 23, 2014, confirming the October 24, 2014 hearing, was sent to each of the Applicants at his last known address.

The Arbitration Hearing:

On October 24, 2014 at 11:00 a.m., Mr. Schnarr attended at the Commission on behalf of State Farm.

By 11:30 a.m., neither Mr. Polifils nor Mr. Louis had appeared at the offices of the Commission.

Pursuant to Rule 37.7 of the Code, and being satisfied that each Applicant had been properly served at his last known address with the Notice of Hearing, the arbitration hearing proceeded in the Applicants’ absence.

As neither Applicant attended to present any evidence, each failed to establish his entitlement to the benefits claimed. The Applicants’ claims were therefore dismissed.

EXPENSES:

On hearing the submissions of counsel for State Farm, I find that Mr. Polifils and Mr. Louis shall each pay $500.00 toward State Farm’s expenses of the arbitration.

December 18, 2014

Robert Bujold Arbitrator

Date