Anastasiya Bakhtina v. Aviva Canada Inc., 2016 ONFSCDRS 320

Financial Services Commission des

Commission services financiers

of Ontario de l’Ontario

Neutral Citation: 2016 ONFSCDRS 320

FSCO A16-000664

BETWEEN:

ANASTASIYA BAKHTINA

Applicant

and

AVIVA CANADA INC.

Insurer

REASONS FOR DECISION

Before: Arbitrator Cindy Dymond

Heard: By teleconference on November 2, 2016

Appearances: Ms. Anastasiya Bakhtina did not participate

Ms. Soni Bal participated for Aviva Canada Inc.

Issues:

The Applicant, Ms. Anastasiya Bakhtina, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on June 16, 2014 and sought accident benefits from Aviva Canada Inc. (“Aviva”), payable under the Schedule.¹ The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation, and Ms. Bakhtina, through her then 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 issue in this Hearing is:

Should Ms. Bakhtina’s Application for Arbitration be dismissed?

Result:

Ms. Bakhtina’s Application for Arbitration is dismissed.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS:

Chronology

A Pre-Hearing discussion in this case was held by telephone conference call arranged by ADR Chambers on September 20, 2016 at 3:00 p.m., in which Ms. Bakhtina failed to participate.

On September 21, 2016, I sent a letter to Ms. Bakhtina at her last known address to advise her of the missed Pre-Hearing discussion. The letter advised her that I had granted her former counsel’s request to be removed from the record as her representative and that she was no longer represented. The letter provided Ms. Bakhtina with an Attendance Notice, setting a date of November 2, 2016 at 3:00 p.m., via teleconference, to hear the issues identified in the Application for Arbitration. The letter also advised her that should she not contact our office or participate in any further proceedings, I would dismiss her Application for Arbitration and consider Aviva’s request for expenses.

The Dismissal

For the reasons that follow, Ms. Bakhtina’s Application for Arbitration is dismissed.

As of November 2, 2016, I was unable to contact Ms. Bakhtina, she had yet to contact ADR Chambers as requested, and had not participated in any of the Arbitration proceedings.

I am satisfied that Ms. Bakhtina was given notice of all of the proceedings related to her Application for Arbitration at her last known address.

Pursuant to Rule 37.7 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code, the Arbitration Hearing proceeded in her absence.

Ms. Bakhtina bears the onus of proving entitlement to the claimed benefits. Since she did not appear at the Hearing and no evidence was presented to support her claims, this Application for Arbitration is dismissed.

EXPENSES:

No expenses were requested with respect to this Hearing. If the parties are unable to agree on the entitlement to, or quantum of, the expenses of this matter, the parties may request an appointment with me for determination of same in accordance with Rules 75 to 79 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

November 28, 2016

Cindy Dymond Arbitrator

Date