Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 22-010598/AABS
In the matter of an application pursuant to subsection 280(2) of the Insurance Act, RSO 1990, c I.8, in relation to statutory accident benefits.
Between:
Dan Hoang Nguyen
Applicant
and
Gore Mutual Insurance Company
Respondent
DECISION
VICE-CHAIR:
Craig Mazerolle
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant:
No submissions
For the Respondent:
Arthur Camporese, Counsel
HEARD: In Writing
OVERVIEW
1Dan Hoang Nguyen, the applicant, was involved in an automobile accident on February 10, 2018, and sought benefits pursuant to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Effective September 1, 2010 (including amendments effective June 1, 2016) (the “Schedule”). The applicant was denied benefits by the respondent, Gore Mutual Insurance Company, and applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal - Automobile Accident Benefits Service (the “Tribunal”) for resolution of the dispute.
2In a case conference report and order released on June 1, 2023, the Tribunal ordered the dispute to proceed to a written hearing. The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing for March 1, 2024, with the Notice of Written Hearing e-mailed to the parties on June 8, 2023.
3The applicant’s initial submissions were due on January 31, 2024. The applicant has not provided any written submissions to the Tribunal. There has also been no Notice of Motion filed by the applicant seeking to extend the initial submissions deadline.
4The respondent sent a letter to the Tribunal (dated February 16, 2024), stating it has not received submissions from the applicant. The respondent is seeking a dismissal of the application.
ISSUES
5As listed in the case conference report and order, the issues in dispute are:
i. Is the applicant entitled to $2,800.00 for psychological assessment, proposed by Pain Rehabilitation Clinic Inc. in a treatment plan dated September 29, 2020?
ii. Is the applicant entitled to $2,600.64 for physiotherapy services, proposed by Pain Rehabilitation Clinic Inc. in a treatment plan/OCF-18 (“plan”) dated January 26, 2021?
iii. Is the applicant entitled to $2,200.00 for a psychological assessment, proposed by Pain Rehabilitation Clinic Inc. in a treatment plan dated February 23, 2021?
iv. Is the applicant entitled to $2,200.00 for general practitioner assessment, proposed by Pain Rehabilitation Clinic Inc. in a treatment plan dated July 12, 2022?
ANALYSIS
6Section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22 states that, if notice of a written hearing has been given to a party who does not then participate in the hearing in accordance with the notice, the Tribunal may proceed with the hearing in the absence of that party’s participation. I am satisfied that the parties received notice of the written hearing, so I shall proceed without submissions from the applicant.
7The applicant has the onus of demonstrating entitlement to the medical benefits in dispute. By not filing any submissions or evidence with the Tribunal, I find that the applicant has not met this burden.
8I further find that the applicant did not file a Notice of Motion requesting an extension of the initial submission deadline.
ORDER
9As the applicant has made no submissions and tendered no evidence in support of the claims before the Tribunal, the applicant has not demonstrated entitlement to the medical benefits in dispute.
10The application is dismissed.
Released: October 10, 2024
Craig Mazerolle
Vice-Chair