A representative who failed to attend his debarment hearing was also a no-show when his reconsideration application was heard by the Financial Services Tribunal (FST).
The representative’s ground for reconsideration was that he was not notified of the debarment hearing and therefore he did not have an opportunity to present his case.
Assupol debarred the applicant in November 2021 for allegedly writing a fraudulent funeral policy, for which he earned commission of R2 480.
According to the forensic investigator, he used the client’s existing records to issue another policy in her name without her consent.
The FST’s decision states: “The applicant was not present at the virtual hearing, neither did he join the meeting on 12 August 2022 despite all reasonable steps taken by the secretariat of the Financial Services Tribunal, as well as this tribunal on the date of the hearing, to accommodate him, which included, inter alia, that the link to the virtual hearing was sent to him prior to the hearing date, a reminder of the hearing date was sent to him on 11 August 2022, and numerous telephone calls were made to him on the date of the hearing (a call made to him at 12:30, which went to voicemail; a call at 12:31, during which the secretariat was informed that the applicant is waiting for someone to send him data and that he needs 10 minutes to join the meeting; and a further call to him at 12:57, which call again went to voicemail).
“To accommodate him, the matter stood down for 30 minutes until 13:00 to afford him the opportunity to attend the hearing and to state his case.
“At no stage did the applicant in writing or verbally request a postponement of the hearing and/or give any reasonable explanation for his absence. This tribunal is satisfied that the applicant was duly notified of the virtual hearing and willingly had decided not to participate therein.”
Assupol presented the tribunal with evidence that notification of the debarment hearing had been successfully emailed to the applicant. The email address it used was the same email address used by the applicant when he emailed his reconsideration application to the FST. The notification was also sent to his postal address.
The minutes of the debarment hearing showed that the applicant was not present at the hearing, nor did he join the meeting virtually. He did not provide an explanation for his non-attendance.
The FST found that the applicant had been duly notified of the debarment/disciplinary hearing, and he had been provided with all the relevant material prior to the debarment hearing for him to state his case and make submissions during the hearing. However, he willingly did not attend the hearing. Therefore, the alleged procedural irregularity about notification of the hearing was without merit.
The application was dismissed.
