The insurer filed a request for reconsideration following a decision in which the Tribunal found that the insurer’s section 33 request was reasonably necessary and upheld its suspension of NEBs. The insurer claimed that the suspension should have lasted for a longer period of time. The Tribunal found that the insurer’s initial notice of suspension did not advise the claimant of his rights under section 33(8) of the SABS, which indicates what would happen if he eventually complied with the section 33 request, and thus the insurer was only entitled to suspend NEBs effective on the date of the later notice of suspension which did outline the claimant’s right under section 33. Vice-Chair Lester granted the reconsideration request in part, finding that the Tribunal made an error in law by obligating the insurer to include information in the section 33 notice that is not detailed in the SABS. As the claimant did not comply with the section 33 request in its entirety, the claimant’s NEBs were suspended as of the date of the initial notice of suspension.
