Financial Services Tribunal

The respondent brought a motion for summary dismissal after the self-represented applicants missed two scheduled pre-hearing conferences without notice.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss.

The applicants subsequently provided doctor's notes and written submissions explaining the absences.

The Tribunal found it just to provide the applicants with another opportunity to proceed toward a hearing, dismissing the motion on the condition that the applicants attend future scheduled events and meet deadlines.

The applicant filed a request for a hearing to challenge a Notice of Proposal to impose a $20,000 administrative penalty for paying compensation to a non-licensee.

After a history of adjournments and failures to attend pre-hearing conferences, the applicant failed to attend the scheduled hearing, which had been set peremptory on him.

The Financial Services Tribunal applied Rule 35.01 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure to dismiss the proceeding without further hearing and without notice, ordering the CEO to carry out the Notice of Proposal.

The Respondent brought two motions to consolidate proceedings before the Financial Services Tribunal.

The first motion sought to combine separate proceedings initiated by the applicants in response to a second Notice of Proposal (NOP2).

The second motion sought to combine the consolidated NOP2 proceeding with an earlier proceeding relating to a first Notice of Proposal (NOP1).

The Tribunal granted the first motion, finding significant commonality of facts and law among the NOP2 applicants.

The Tribunal dismissed the second motion, finding little commonality between NOP1 and NOP2, and noting that combining them would cause prejudice and undue delay to the NOP1 proceeding.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal regarding a Notice of Proposal to revoke his life insurance and accident and sickness insurance agent licence.

During pre-hearing conferences, the applicant's licence expired and he confirmed he did not intend to renew it or proceed with a hearing on the merits.

The Tribunal dismissed the proceeding pursuant to subsection 407.1(8) of the Insurance Act and directed the respondent to issue a final order carrying out the Notice of Proposal.

Following the dismissal of three motions brought by the applicants, the parties consented to a costs order.

The Financial Services Tribunal ordered the applicants to pay $2,000 in costs to the respondent within 60 days.

The Applicants filed a Request for Hearing regarding a Notice of Proposal to impose a compliance order and administrative penalties.

After failing to attend a scheduled pre-hearing conference and indicating an unwillingness to continue participating, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss.

The Applicants failed to provide written submissions showing reasonable cause for their non-attendance.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Request for Hearing pursuant to section 4.6 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and Rule 35.01 of the Tribunal's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

The Applicant requested a review or variance of a pre-hearing conference order to allow for the late filing of reply submissions on a motion regarding jurisdiction.

The Applicant had missed multiple extended deadlines and failed to attend the pre-hearing conference where the order was made.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the public interest in the finality of decisions and the need to maintain the integrity of Tribunal orders outweighed any prejudice to the Applicant.

The applicant, a former licensed mortgage broker, requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal to dispute a Notice of Proposal to impose $82,500 in administrative penalties.

Over the course of nearly a year and six pre-hearing conferences, the applicant repeatedly failed to comply with Tribunal orders, retain counsel, or provide medical evidence to support his requests for delay.

The respondent brought a motion to dismiss the proceeding for delay.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss, giving the applicant 30 days to comply.

The applicant failed to respond, and the Tribunal dismissed the request for hearing, ordering the imposition of the administrative penalties.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the mortgage broker and agent licences of the applicants.

The applicants requested a hearing, but their licences expired before the hearing took place and were not renewed.

The Chief Executive Officer of FSRA brought a motion arguing that the Tribunal no longer had jurisdiction to revoke the expired licences.

The Tribunal agreed, finding that the Notice of Proposal had become moot, and dismissed the proceedings pertaining to the individual applicants.

The applicant brought a motion for the recusal of the adjudicator from hearing another recusal motion.

The applicant argued that the adjudicator should recuse himself from hearing the motion for his own recusal due to an apprehension of bias.

The adjudicator declined to recuse himself, finding that the law is well-settled that it is up to the individual adjudicator whose recusal is sought to make the decision on the recusal motion.

Following the dismissal of the applicants' Charter motion to exclude evidence gathered under a summons, the respondent sought costs.

The parties subsequently agreed to a costs order of $500 against the applicants.

The Financial Services Tribunal issued a consent order directing the applicants to pay $500 in costs to the respondent.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to amend the applicant's mortgage broker licence and impose an administrative penalty of $3,500 for failing to maintain E&O insurance.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal but subsequently failed to attend three scheduled pre-hearing conferences.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss the proceeding.

As the applicant failed to provide written submissions showing reasonable cause for their non-attendance, the Tribunal dismissed the request for hearing.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal to challenge the Superintendent's refusal to order the Ontario Pension Board to transfer his pension to the federal Public Service Pension Plan and pay him the excess commuted value.

The applicant argued he was treated unfairly compared to plan members under age 55.

The Tribunal found it lacked jurisdiction to grant the requested relief, as neither the Superintendent nor the Tribunal has authority to compel the federal government or the Federal Plan to accept a pension transfer.

The Superintendent was ordered to carry out the Notice of Intended Decision.

The applicant filed a Request for Hearing with the Financial Services Tribunal regarding a decision of the Superintendent of Financial Services.

The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss the request and gave the applicant 30 days to make written submissions.

The applicant failed to make any submissions within the required timeframe.

Consequently, the Tribunal ordered that the Request for Hearing be dismissed.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal after the Superintendent proposed to issue him an insurance agent licence with conditions, based on ongoing Law Society disciplinary proceedings.

At the hearing, the applicant sought to exclude the Law Society decisions from evidence and, alternatively, to adduce evidence challenging the underlying facts of those decisions.

The Tribunal admitted the Law Society decisions as relevant evidence and held that challenging their underlying facts would constitute an impermissible collateral attack.

Consequently, the Tribunal adjourned the proceeding sine die pending the outcome of the applicant's appeal before the Law Society Tribunal Appeal Division.

The Applicant, a licensed life insurance agent, requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal regarding a Notice of Proposal to suspend his licence for three months.

The parties agreed that the Applicant failed to complete his required continuing education credits for five consecutive licensing periods and made false statements on two licence renewal applications regarding the completion of those credits.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's repeated failure to comply with continuing education requirements and his provision of false information justified the proposed sanction.

The Tribunal ordered the Superintendent to suspend the Applicant's licence for a period of three months.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to impose administrative penalties of $300,000 on the applicant for dealing in mortgages without a licence.

The applicant requested a hearing but subsequently failed to provide ordered disclosure and indicated it would take no further steps.

The Financial Services Tribunal issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss for delay.

As the applicant made no submissions, the Tribunal dismissed the proceeding and ordered the Superintendent to carry out the proposal to impose the penalties.

The applicant, a licensed life insurance agent, failed to maintain errors and omissions (E&O) insurance for two periods totaling 14.5 months due to a serious illness.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to impose an administrative monetary penalty (AMP) of $2,000.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal, arguing the penalty was excessive given his illness and the fact that he had not written any policies for seven years.

The Tribunal found that while an AMP was appropriate to promote compliance and prevent economic benefit, the proposed amount did not account for the exceptional circumstances.

The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to impose a reduced AMP of $1,000.