An order that is made regarding a licence holder reflects a situation at a particular point in time. The status of a licence holder can change. Readers should check the current status of a person’s or entity’s licence on the Licensing Link section of FSCO’s website. Readers may also wish to contact the person or entity directly to get additional information or clarification about the events that resulted in the order.
Superintendent of Financial Services Regarding the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.1.8, as amended (the “Act), in particular, sections 31(1) (c) 393(9) – 393(11),
AND REGARDING Ivy Hoi-Yee Mok, life insurance agent DECISION and ORDER Introduction: A Notice of Opportunity for Hearing dated March 14, 2011 (the Notice) informed Ms. Mok of allegations against her and the opportunity for a hearing before an Advisory Board. The Notice advised Ms. Mok that if a hearing was not requested, the Superintendent would make a decision based on information in the possession of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (the Commission). Ms. Mok was also advised that such decision could include suspension or revocation of her licence as a life insurance agent.
I have received an affidavit from Karyn Lake, Qualification Verification Officer at the Commission that the Notice was served by registered mail and regular mail and that Canada Post confirmed successful delivery. The affidavit further stated that no request for a hearing has been received. I am satisfied that the Notice was properly served in accordance with the provisions of the Insurance Act.
A copy of the allegations is attached to this Decision. The Evidence: Since Ms. Mok has not requested a hearing, the evidence of Commission staff in the particulars attached to the Notice is uncontroverted.
The evidence can be summarized as follows. The Commission conducted an audit of Ms. Mok’s compliance with the requirement to maintain errors and omissions insurance. The Commission made several attempts to contact her by email, registered mail and by telephone without success.
Findings of Fact I find the allegation that Ms. Mok has failed to maintain errors and
omissions insurance to be established. The reasons for this finding are Ms. Mok’s failure to respond to the requests by the Commission for evidence of such insurance and Ms. Mok’s failure to request a hearing or otherwise contact the Commission in response to the Notice.
I find the allegation that Ms. Mok has failed to facilitate an investigation to be established. The reasons are Ms. Mok’s failure to maintain an address on file at the Commission where she can be contacted and her failure to provide evidence of such insurance in response to email, registered mail and telephone requests for such evidence. Ms. Mok did not request a hearing or otherwise contact the Commission in response to the Notice.
I find the allegation that Ms. Mok is unsuitable to hold a licence as an insurance agent to be established by virtue of her failure to maintain errors and omissions insurance and her failure to facilitate an examination.
In the absence of testimony by Ms. Mok, I am not aware of any explanations for her behaviour or mitigating circumstances.
Decision: I have found that Ms. Mok is unsuitable to hold a licence as a life insurance agent.
Findings of unsuitability frequently result in revocation of the licence of an insurance agent.
Errors and omissions insurance is necessary to protect consumers from negligence by insurance agents. Insurance agents without errors and omissions insurance may not have sufficient assets to indemnify policy holders or applicants for insurance from such losses. Accordingly insurance agents that do not have errors and omissions insurance cannot be allowed to be engaged in the business of insurance.
In this case, Ms. Mok would not respond to the Commission on this matter. Insurance agents must be governable and amenable to being regulated. The Insurance Act imposes a duty on licensed persons to facilitate an examination. Responding to information requests is an attribute of a person suitable to be an insurance agent.
Since Ms. Mok has not requested a hearing, there are no explanations for her behaviour, nor is there any demonstrated interest in maintaining her licence as an insurance agent.
Accordingly considering the lack of suitability as demonstrated by the
failure to facilitate an examination, the absence of the necessary insurance to protect the public and lack of any explanation for such behaviour, I believe that the appropriate penalty is revocation of Ivy Hoi-Yee Mok’s licence as an insurance agent.
ORDER Accordingly, the life insurance agent licence of Ivy Hoi-Yee Mok is hereby revoked by this order.
Dated at Toronto, this fifth day of January, 2012 Grant Swanson Executive Director, Licensing and Market Conduct by delegated Authority from Superintendent of Financial Services
Schedule 1 The following allegation was set out in the Notice: 1. Mok has failed to maintain appropriate errors and omissions insurance (“E&O”), as is required by section 13 of the Regulation.
2. Mok has failed to facilitate an investigation by the Superintendent of whether she is in compliance with the requirement to maintain appropriate E&O insurance.
3. Mok’s failure to comply with the requirements to maintain E&O and to respond to the regulator make her unsuitable to hold a life insurance and accident and sickness insurance agent licence in Ontario.