Said Shojae-Sisi v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2015 ONFSCDRS 74

Financial Services Commission des

Commission services financiers

of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2015 ONFSCDRS 74

FSCO A13-014304

BETWEEN:

SAID SHOJAE-SISI

Applicant

and

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurer

REASONS FOR DECISION

Before: Arbitrator Janet Davies

Heard: By telephone conference call on March 11, 2015

Appearances: Mr. Said Shojae-Sisi did not participate

Mr. Thomas Elliot participated for State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Issues:

The Applicant, Mr. Said Shojae-Sisi, was injured in an automobile accident on July 10, 2010 and sought accident benefits from State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”) under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation and Mr. Shojae-Sisi, through his legal representative, 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 Preliminary Hearing are:

Should Mr. Said Shojae-Sisi’s Application for Arbitration be dismissed?
Is State Farm entitled to their expenses for these Arbitration proceedings?

Result:

Mr. Said Shojae-Sisi’s Application for Arbitration is dismissed.
State Farm is entitled to their expenses in these Arbitration proceedings in the amount of $250.00.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

On November 22, 2013, the Financial Services Commission of Ontario received an Application for Arbitration filed on behalf of Mr. Said Shojae-Sisi. A Pre-Hearing discussion was scheduled to take place in person on January 29, 2015 at 9:00 a.m., at the offices of ADR Chambers.

On January 5, 2015, a request was filed by Mr. Essi Zandi, legal counsel for Mr. Shojae-Sisi, to be removed from the record as his firm had lost contact with Mr. Shojae-Sisi. He had not been able to reach him by telephone or by registered mail. As I was satisfied that counsel had met the requirements to withdraw from the record, as required by Rule 9.7 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code (DRPC), and there was no objection, I granted his request and removed him from the record.

Mr. Shojae-Sisi was notified by registered letter on January 19, 2015 that he would be self-represented at the Pre-Hearing scheduled for January 29, 2015, should he wish to proceed with his application. Mr. Shojae-Sisi did not contact our office as requested in the letter and did not attend the Pre-Hearing discussion. As a result, State Farm requested that his Application for Arbitration be dismissed with consideration for their expenses in having to prepare for the Arbitration proceeding.

On January 30, 2015, I issued a further registered letter to Mr. Shojae-Sisi, advising him that a Preliminary Issue Hearing was scheduled for March 11, 2015 at 8:45 a.m., by telephone, to consider State Farm’s request to have his application dismissed with costs. Mr. Shojae-Sisi was advised that should he not contact our office or participate in any further Arbitration proceedings, that I would proceed in his absence and grant State Farm’s request to have his Application for Arbitration dismissed and would award costs.

On March 11, 2011, both Mr. Thomas Elliot and Mr. Bob Atkins attended for State Farm. I was unable to reach Mr. Shojae-Sisi at his last known telephone number, he did not contact our office and his registered letter was returned.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

Rule 68 of the DRPC permits an Arbitrator to dismiss a proceeding without a Hearing where the proceeding is frivolous, vexatious, or is commenced in bad faith providing written notice has been given to the parties of the intention to dismiss the proceedings.

I am satisfied that Mr. Shojae-Sisi was given notice of the Preliminary Issue Hearing as required by Rule 68(2) of the DRPC at his last known address contained in the records of the Dispute Resolution Group, as required by Rule 5.7 of the DRPC.

I am satisfied that Mr. Shojae-Sisi was given an opportunity to make submissions should he wish to object to the dismissal as required by Rule 68(3) of the DRPC.

As Mr. Shojae-Sisi did not participate, his Application for Arbitration is dismissed without a Hearing under Rule 68(1) of the DRPC on the basis that the application was frivolous, vexatious, or was commenced in bad faith as he failed to participate in any of the proceedings.

EXPENSES:

State Farm requested their expenses in the amount of $500.00 for having to prepare for the proceedings in which Mr. Shojae-Sisi did not participate. I have considered Rule 75.2(d) of the DRPC having regard to the criteria in determining whether costs may be awarded and find that Mr. Shojae-Sisi prolonged the Arbitration proceedings by not participating. In determining the quantum, I have considered Rule 78.1 of the DRPC and find that State Farm is entitled to expenses assessed at $250.00 in “throw away” costs in having to prepare for the extended Arbitration proceedings.

April 14, 2015

Janet Davies

Arbitrator

Date