Citation: Mai v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, 2026 ONLAT 25-005522/AABS

Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 25-005522/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:

Thi Thuy Mai

Applicant

and

Aviva Insurance Company of Canada

Respondent

DECISION

ADJUDICATOR:

Melanie Malach

APPEARANCES:

For the Applicant:

Thi Thuy Mai, Self-represented

For the Respondent:

Kristofer B. Angle, Counsel

HEARD:

By way of written submissions

OVERVIEW

1Thi Thuy Mai, the applicant, was involved in an automobile accident on October 28, 2022, 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, Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, and applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal - Automobile Accident Benefits Service (the “Tribunal”) for resolution of the dispute.

ISSUES

2The issues in dispute are:

i. Is the applicant entitled to $2,377.62 for Assistive Devices, proposed by True Life in a treatment plan, dated March 21, 2023?

ii. Is the applicant entitled to $4,817.21 for Physical Rehabilitation Services, proposed by True Life in a treatment plan, dated April 19, 2023?

iii. Is the applicant entitled to $1,697.97 for an Attendant Care Needs Assessment, proposed by True Life in a treatment plan dated February 19, 2023?

iv. Is the respondent liable to pay an award under s. 10 of Reg. 664 because it unreasonably withheld or delayed payments to the applicant?

v. Is the applicant entitled to interest on any overdue payment of benefits?

RESULT

3I find that the applicant is not entitled to the treatment plans in dispute, interest or an award.

ANALYSIS

4In the Case Conference Report and Order (“CCRO”), released on August 11, 2025, the Tribunal ordered the dispute to proceed to a written hearing. The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing for February 6, 2026. Notice of the written hearing was sent to the parties on August 20, 2025, using the contact information provided.

5On December 5, 2025, counsel for the applicant filed a Removal of Representative form. Counsel’s email was sent to the applicant, the respondent and the Tribunal advising that he would no longer be representing the applicant regarding her accident benefits claim because there was a breakdown of the solicitor client relationship.

6The applicant’s submissions were due on January 7, 2026. The Tribunal has not received the applicant’s written submissions.

7By email dated January 8, 2026, counsel for the respondent wrote to the parties and the Tribunal advising that it had not received the applicant’s submissions. It further advised that it had not received anything further in this matter since December 5, 2025. It therefore requested that pursuant to s. 3.4(d) of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Rules, 2023 (“Rules”), that the applicant’s Application be dismissed without a hearing given the applicant has clearly abandoned the proceedings. The respondent further requested that the Tribunal issue a notice under Rule 3.5 of the Rules and provide the parties with five days notice of the Tribunal’s intention to dismiss the applicant’s Application.

8On January 26, 2026, the respondent filed a Notice of Motion requesting that the Tribunal provide notice of its intention to dismiss this appeal in five days on the grounds that the applicant has abandoned the proceeding, pursuant to Rules 3.4(2) and 3.5 of the Rules. By Motion Order dated January 29, 2026, the Tribunal denied the respondent’s motion.

9I find that as the applicant did not file a Notice of Withdrawal with the Tribunal, the file was not closed. I will therefore proceed with the hearing pursuant to s. 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act. I find that the parties had notice of the written hearing by way of email on August 20, 2025.

10The applicant has the onus of demonstrating entitlement to the treatment plans in dispute, an award, and interest. As no submissions or evidence have been filed with the Tribunal by the applicant, I find that the applicant has not met her burden of demonstrating entitlement to the treatment plans in dispute, an award or interest.

ORDER

11For the reasons outlined above, I find that the applicant is not entitled to the treatment plans in dispute, an award or interest. The application is dismissed.