Definity Insurance lost a bid to block an auto accident claim after an Ontario tribunal found it failed to prove email delivery consent.
The Ontario License Appeal Tribunal released its decision on May 8, 2026, in Berro v. Definity Insurance Company, 2026 CanLII 45561 (ON LAT), ruling that applicant Hamdi Berro could proceed with his statutory accident benefits claim despite filing his OCF-1 application 431 days after the accident.
Berro was injured in a motor vehicle accident on April 10, 2023. He notified Definity by telephone on April 14, 2023, within the seven-day window under section 32(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. The dispute centered on what happened next.
Definity argued it emailed Berro the application package the same day he reported the accident, including the OCF-1, OCF-2, OCF-3, and OCF-5 forms along with a summary of basic accident benefits. The insurer maintained it had satisfied its obligations by attaching the documents to an email, and that it was not required to confirm Berro received or could access them. The completed OCF-1 did not arrive until June 28, 2024.
Adjudicator Lisa Holland disagreed. She found Definity had not proven Berro consented to electronic delivery as required by section 64 of the Schedule, which permits delivery by electronic means only if the recipient "consents to delivery by electronic means."
The adjudicator pointed to several gaps in the insurer's evidence. Definity could not explain how it obtained the email address it used, and that address differed from the one Berro later provided to the Tribunal. A log note from the April 14, 2023 call by adjuster Maria Pilar Hechavarria recorded that Berro was confused answering some questions and identified himself as the brother of Definity's insured. The insurer told him it would refer his claim to a preferred provider network to assist with the forms, but Definity could not show whether that appointment was ever made.
A December 4, 2025 Case Conference Report confirmed Berro speaks Arabic and requires an interpreter, and the adjudicator found he may not have fully understood the April 14 conversation. A June 1, 2023 follow-up letter sent by regular mail did not include hard copies of the forms or a summary of benefits.
Holland applied the framework from Horvath and Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, 2003 ONFSCDRS 92, which requires an explanation to be credible before its reasonableness can be assessed. She accepted Berro's account that his brother was hospitalized for three months after the accident, creating caregiving and family obligations that prevented him from seeking treatment at a clinic that could have helped him complete the forms.
The adjudicator weighed prejudice to Definity against hardship to the claimant. She found limited prejudice to the insurer and significant hardship in denying access to potential benefits. Letters Definity sent on July 10, 2024, and November 26, 2025, which acknowledged Berro might need hard copies of certain documents, further undercut its position.
Definity failed to demonstrate it satisfied its obligations under section 32(2). Berro's claim moves forward.
