An Ontario tribunal has shut the door on an auto accident claim filed more than three and a half years late, siding firmly with the insurer.
In a decision released May 6, 2026, the Ontario License Appeal Tribunal dismissed Matthew Makosz's bid for statutory accident benefits from Belair Insurance Company Inc. in Makosz v Belair Insurance Company Inc., 2026 CanLII 42209 (ON LAT), ruling he had blown the 30-day filing window by 1,363 days - and offered no reasonable excuse for it.
The case stems from a September 8, 2021 collision in which Makosz says another vehicle, turning left through an intersection, clipped the front driver's side of his car. He reported whiplash, neck and back pain. Emergency personnel attended the scene, and Makosz notified Belair within days. On that point, both sides agreed he had complied with section 32(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
What followed is where the file unraveled. Belair sent Makosz an accident benefits package on September 20, 2021, complete with a step-by-step guide and the OCF-1 application form. Section 32(5) of the Schedule gives claimants 30 days from receipt to send it back. He did not. Belair's adjuster log notes show repeated phone tag through October, but when the parties did connect, conversation centered on property damage, not injuries.
By October 25, 2021, the insurer warned in writing that the file would close without the OCF-1. It closed on November 5, 2021. Makosz briefly resurfaced in January 2022 asking the file be reopened - the insurer obliged, resending the form - but nothing came of it. Two years later, in January 2024, he called only to confirm the file was still closed. The completed OCF-1 finally arrived on June 2, 2025.
Makosz, self-represented, offered two explanations for the delay: he was "not able" to seek treatment until January 2022, and the accident, he said, had caused schizophrenia that landed him in court-ordered psychiatric facilities. Vice-Chair Trina Morissette found neither explanation credible. The treatment argument did not square with the fact that Makosz had been chatting with Belair throughout that period about his vehicle. As for the schizophrenia claim, there was no medical documentation, no Form 1s, no court orders - nothing in the record beyond his own statements to the adjuster.
Belair leaned on the framework set out in Horvath and Allstate Insurance Company of Canada and reiterated in K.H. v. Northbridge: the onus sits with the insured to provide a credible, reasonable explanation, weighed against prejudice to the insurer. Morissette agreed the multi-year delay had hampered Belair's ability to investigate, and that prejudice outweighed any hardship to Makosz.
The Tribunal also declined to entertain a fresh preliminary issue Belair tried to add in its submissions, citing procedural fairness and Rule 20.4 of the Licence Appeal Tribunal Rules, 2023, which requires preliminary issues to be flagged at the case conference. Belair likewise failed to make its case that Makosz had missed the two-year limitation period to dispute denials - because it filed no submissions on the point.
The application was dismissed.
