A preliminary issue hearing was held to determine whether the claimant was barred from proceeding with her application for non-earner benefits because the two-year limitation period had expired. The claimant argued that she did not discover that she was able to dispute the non-earner benefit until she retained a lawyer five years after the accident because she was illiterate in English. Adjudicator Grieves found that the insurer provided a clear, unequivocal, valid denial of the non-earner benefits and the denial satisfied all of the requirements set out in Smith v. Co-Operators. With regards to discoverability, the adjudicator held that the discoverability date was the date on which a reasonable diligent person would have known they had a cause of action. Between the date of the denial until hiring a lawyer, the claimant took no action to pursue her claim. The claimant further pleads that the limitation period should be extended under section 7 of the LAT. However, Adjudicator Grieves was not satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for applying for the extension or granting relief. The claimant was barred from proceeding with her claim.
