Sinthu Vijakumar v. TD General Insurance Company, 2015 ONFSCDRS 48

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

Neutral Citation: 2015 ONFSCDRS 48

FSCO A13-008230

BETWEEN:

SINTHU VIJAKUMAR

Applicant

and

TD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurer

DECISION ON A MOTION

Before: Sudabeh Mashkuri

Heard: March 3, 2015, at the offices of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario in Toronto

Appearances: Shawn Jafari for Ms. Vijakumar Sarvnaz Raissi for TD General Insurance Company

The Applicant, Sinthu Vijakumar, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on December 21, 2010. She applied for benefits from TD General Insurance Company (“TD General”), payable under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation, and Ms. Vijakumar applied for arbitration at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.

Mr. Jafari, Ms. Vijakumar’s representative, has been unable to contact the Applicant for some time and has now brought a motion requesting that an order issue to remove him as counsel of record for Ms. Vijakumar.

The initial pre-hearing discussion for this case took place on April 2, 2014. Ms. Vijakumar appeared at that time, and dates for the arbitration hearing, March 3 to 5, 2015, were set in the presence of the Applicant and her representative.

In September 2014, Ms. Raissi on behalf of TD General wrote to FSCO to resolve the issue of outstanding productions in relation to this file. According to Mr. Jafari, the Applicant could not be contacted to produce the documents requested by TD General.

On February 17, 2015, Mr. Jafari filed a motion to be removed as counsel of record for Ms. Vijakumar. I convened the arbitration hearing on March 3, 2015 and heard Mr. Jafari’s motion to withdraw as legal representative of record. The motion included letters attached as exhibits to an affidavit sent to the Applicant dated September 24, 2014, December 8, 2014, January 9, 2015, and February 5, 2015. According to Mr. Jafari, the Applicant did not respond to any of the letters and his office was unable to contact Ms. Vijakumar by telephone.

I am satisfied that the Applicant was properly served with this motion, and am satisfied that there has been a breakdown of communication between the Applicant and her representative.

Mr. Shawn Jafari is removed as legal representative for the Applicant Sinthu Vijakumar.

March 13, 2015

Sudabeh Mashkuri Arbitrator

Date