Licence Appeal Tribunal upholds Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund’s denial of benefits claim
The Licence Appeal Tribunal has held that a taxi passenger claiming benefits failed to establish an automobile accident as defined by the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule - Effective September 1, 2010 (including amendments effective June 1, 2016) (SABS).
In Singh v Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund (MVACF), 2026 CanLII 100121 (ON LAT), the applicant alleged that she was a passenger in the rear seat of a taxi involved in a multi-vehicle collision on June 5, 2020.
According to the applicant, a white SUV and a blue pick-up struck the taxi. Relying on a handwritten taxi receipt from the day of the alleged accident, she claimed benefits under the SABS.
The respondent, the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund, rejected the applicant’s claim because she failed to report the incident to it for over a year.
The respondent also denied benefits since the applicant submitted little to no evidence to support the occurrence of an accident that had impaired her.
Before the Licence Appeal Tribunal’s Automobile Accident Benefits Service, the applicant applied for the resolution of the dispute. She argued that she deserved the disputed benefits under the promissory estoppel principle.
The tribunal denied the application.
On a balance of probabilities, the Licence Appeal Tribunal determined that the applicant failed to satisfy her onus to show the occurrence of an accident under s. 3(1) of the SABS and her involvement in such an accident.
Based on the receipt, the tribunal acknowledged that the applicant did take a taxi ride on June 5, 2020. However, the tribunal found no contemporaneous or corroborative evidence of a motor vehicle collision that happened that day, such as:
The tribunal saw insufficient medical evidence supporting that the applicant had sustained any accident-related impairment.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal decided that the principle of estoppel did not apply, given the noted deficiencies in the applicant’s application, her knowledge of these gaps, and her failure to remedy them.
The tribunal noted that the respondent, as the insurer of last resort, adjusted the applicant’s claim in good faith and fairly pointed to determinative informational gaps in the claim.
Here are some of the Ontario Licence Appeal Tribunal’s other recent decisions involving accident benefit claims.
In a proceeding in which an injured applicant could not access accident benefits from an insurance company, the tribunal issued a Sept. 16 decision awarding him 10 percent of the benefits claimed due to the insurer’s unfair conduct.
On Aug. 12, the tribunal did not find a man injured during a carjacking entitled to the benefits he claimed because the incident was not an accident as defined in s. 3(1) of the SABS.
Enjoy this story? Read the latest personal injury law news on the main page!
