Disclaimer
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 FSRA’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.
Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario

IN THE MATTER OF the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended (the “Act”), in particular sections 441, 441.2 and 441.3;

AND IN THE MATTER OF 24/7 Auto Collision Inc., operating as 24/7 Auto and High Tech Towing;

AND IN THE MATTER OF 2551662 Ontario Inc., operating as Hi Tech Towing and Hi Tech Auto;

AND IN THE MATTER OF Altaf Hussain.


NOTICE OF PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE COMPLIANCE ORDERS & IMPOSE ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES

TO:
24/7 Auto Collision Inc.
3229 Wolfedale Road,
Mississauga, Ontario, L5C 1V8

AND TO:
2551662 Ontario Inc.
845 Central Parkway West,
Mississauga, Ontario, L5C 2V9

AND TO: Altaf Hussain

TAKE NOTICE THAT pursuant to section 441 of the Act, and by delegated authority from the Chief Executive Officer of the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (the “Chief Executive Officer”), the Director, Litigation and Enforcement (the “Director”), has made a Report, attached as Schedule “A”, and is proposing to order Altaf Hussain (“Hussain”), 24/7 Auto Collision Inc. and 2551662 Ontario Inc. to immediately cease the following activities for a period of one year:

  1. charging for any work performed if it is reasonable to expect that all or a portion of such charges will be directly or indirectly paid for by an insurer;
  2. accepting any fees, funds, or anything of value for any work performed if it is reasonable to expect that all or a portion of such fees, funds, or thing of value will be directly or indirectly paid for by an insurer;
  3. holding themselves out to consumers as being authorized to perform any work that will be directly or indirectly paid for by an insurer; and
  4. advertising, soliciting, or offering any services related to any work that will be directly or indirectly paid for by an insurer.

AND TAKE NOTICE THAT pursuant to section 441.3 of the Act, and by delegated authority from the Chief Executive Officer, the Director is proposing to impose an administrative penalty of $20,000 on Hussain for engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices (“UDAP”) contrary to section 439 of the Act, specifically seeking consideration for goods or services in connection with a claim under a contract of insurance which were not provided to a claimant or were provided in a substantially deficient manner, contrary to section 6(1) of the UDAP Rule.

AND TAKE NOTICE THAT pursuant to section 441.3 of the Act, and by delegated authority from the Chief Executive Officer, the Director is proposing to impose two administrative penalties in the total amount of $15,000 on 24/7 Auto Collision Inc:

  1. An administrative penalty of $10,000 on 24/7 Auto Collision Inc. operating as 24/7 Auto (“24/7 Auto”), for engaging in a UDAP contrary to section 439 of the Act, specifically seeking consideration for goods or services in connection with a claim under a contract of insurance which were not provided to a claimant or were provided in a substantially deficient manner, contrary to section 6(1) of the UDAP Rule.
  2. An administrative penalty of $5,000 on 24/7 Auto Collision Inc. operating as High Tech Towing (“HTT”), for engaging in a UDAP contrary to section 439 of the Act, specifically seeking consideration for goods or services in connection with a claim under a contract of insurance which were not provided to a claimant or were provided in a substantially deficient manner, contrary to section 6(1) of the UDAP Rule.

AND TAKE NOTICE THAT pursuant to section 441.3 of the Act, and by delegated authority from the Chief Executive Officer, the Director is proposing to impose an administrative penalty of $2,500 on 2551662 Ontario Inc., operating as Hi Tech Towing (“HITT”) for engaging in a UDAP contrary to section 439 of the Act, specifically seeking consideration for goods or services in connection with a claim under a contract of insurance which were not provided to a claimant or were provided in a substantially deficient manner, contrary to section 6(1) of the UDAP Rule.

Details of these contraventions and reasons for this proposal are described below. This Notice of Proposal includes allegations that may be considered at a hearing.

SI VOUS DÉSIREZ RECEVOIR CET AVIS EN FRANÇAIS, veuillez nous envoyer votre demande par courriel immédiatement à: contactcentre@fsrao.ca

YOU ARE ENTITLED TO A HEARING BY THE FINANCIAL SERVICES TRIBUNAL (THE “TRIBUNAL”) PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 441(3), 441(5), 441.3(2) AND 441.3(5) OF THE ACT. A hearing by the Tribunal about this Notice of Proposal may be requested by completing the enclosed Request for Hearing Form (Form 1) and delivering it to the Tribunal within fifteen (15) days after this Notice of Proposal is received by you. The Request for Hearing Form (Form 1) must be mailed, delivered, faxed or emailed to:

Address:
Financial Services Tribunal
25 Sheppard Avenue W, 7th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6S6

Attention: Registrar

Fax: 416-226-7750

Email: contact@fstontario.ca

TAKE NOTICE THAT if you do not deliver a written request for a hearing to the Tribunal within fifteen (15) days after this Notice of Proposal is received by you, orders will be issued as described in this Notice of Proposal. TAKE FURTHER NOTICE of the payment requirements in section 5 of Ontario Regulation 408/12, which state that the penalized person or entity shall pay the penalty no later than thirty (30) days after the person or entity is given notice of the order imposing the penalty, after the matter is finally determined if a hearing is requested or such longer time as may be specified in the order.

For additional copies of the Request for Hearing Form (Form 1), visit the Tribunal's website at www.fstontario.ca

The hearing before the Tribunal will proceed in accordance with the Rules of Practice and Procedure for Proceedings before the Financial Services Tribunal ("Rules") made under the authority of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, as amended. The Rules are available at the website of the Tribunal: www.fstontario.ca. Alternatively, a copy can be obtained by telephoning the Registrar of the Tribunal at 416-590-7294, or toll free at 1-800-668-0128 extension 7294.

At a hearing, your character, conduct and/or competence may be in issue. You may be furnished with further and/or other particulars, including further or other grounds, to support this proposal.

REASONS FOR PROPOSAL

I. INTRODUCTION

  1. 24/7 Auto and Hussain committed UDAPs by charging for goods and or services that were not provided, including vehicle repairs that did not take place, and replacement parts that were not replaced. HTT, HITT and Hussain committed UDAPs by charging for vehicle towing that did not occur.
  2. These are reasons for the proposal by the Director to impose an administrative penalty of $20,000 on Hussain, $15,000 on 24/7 Auto Collision Inc. and $2,500 on HITT and to impose compliance orders on all three.

II. BACKGROUND

  1. The Financial Services Regulatory Authority (“FSRA”) has the legal responsibility under the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario Act, 2016, S.O. 2016, c27, Sched. 8 to regulate the insurance industry, including service providers, in order to “protect the public interest and enhance public confidence in the regulated sectors.”
  2. FSRA has authority under certain parts of the Act and its regulations to enforce this legislation with regard to any person involved in the business of insurance.
  3. Aviva Canada (“Aviva”) is an insurance company that operates in Ontario and provides auto insurance to consumers.
  4. 24/7 Auto Collision Inc. operates as 24/7 Auto and HTT. 24/7 Auto is an auto repair shop to which vehicles involved in accidents can be brought for repair. HTT is a towing company that services vehicles in accidents.
  5. 2551662 Ontario Inc. operates as Hi Tech Auto and HITT. HITT is a towing company that services vehicles involved in accidents.
  6. Hussain is the owner and sole director and officer of 24/7 Auto, HTT, and HITT.
  7. 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain are not licenced under the Act.

A. Charges for Goods and Services Not Provided

i. Towing services not provided or only partially provided
  1. From June 2022 to May 2023, HTT and HITT submitted three towing invoices (the “Towing Invoices”) to Aviva in the total amount of $1,818.96 for towing services that were either not provided or partially provided. See Schedule B for the Towing Invoice details.
  2. The failure to provide the towing services that were invoiced was confirmed by the owners of the vehicles, GPS data, and the collision reports, or lack thereof, from the collision reporting centres to which the vehicles were allegedly towed.
  3. Aviva did not pay HTT or HITT for the Towing Invoices.
ii. Repairs not done and replacement parts not replaced
  1. From June 2022 to January 2023, 24/7 Auto submitted six invoices (the “Repair Invoices”) to Aviva in the total amount of $70,457.72. 24/7 Auto invoiced for items that were not replaced, items that were repaired instead of being replaced, and substantially deficient repairs. See Schedule C for the Repair Invoices details.
  2. Aviva retained Niagara Appraisal Services (“NAS”) to appraise the vehicles for which the Repair Invoices were submitted. NAS identified discrepancies between the repairs performed by 24/7 Auto and the Repair Invoices.

B. Hussain Interview

  1. On June 24, 2025, FSRA interviewed Hussain. Hussain stated that he is not involved in the day-to-day operations of 24/7 Auto, HTT, and HITT.
  2. When asked whether anyone verifies the accuracy of the invoices submitted by 24/7 Auto, Hussain stated there is no one responsible for reviewing invoices to verify accuracy.

III. CONTRAVENTIONS OR FAILURES TO COMPLY WITH THE ACT

A. Charging for Goods and Services Not Provided

  1. Section 439 of the Act states that no person shall engage in any UDAP.
  2. Section 441(1) of the Act provides that upon examination or investigation, or upon any other evidence, the Chief Executive Officer shall make a report if they are of the opinion that a person has committed or is committing any act, or has pursued or is pursuing any course of conduct, that is an unfair or deceptive act or practice or might reasonably be expected to result in a state of affairs that would constitute an unfair or deceptive act or practice.
  3. Section 2(1) of the UDAP Rule defines a UDAP as conduct, including inaction or omission, which results in, or could reasonably be expected to result in the outcomes, events or circumstances set out in s. 3 through s. 12 of the UDAP Rule.
  4. Section 2(2)(b) of the UDAP Rule states that an outcome, event or circumstance resulting from conduct, including inaction or omission, committed by a Director of a person who provides goods or services to a claimant which are fully or partially expected to be paid for through the proceeds of insurance, will be deemed to be reasonably expected if it would be expected by a reasonable person in that person’s business or profession with full knowledge of all and any facts and circumstances that person knew about or, with reasonable diligence under the circumstances, ought to, have known.
  5. Section 6(1) of the UDAP Rule states that it is a UDAP for consideration to be sought for goods or services in connection with a claim under a contract of insurance which were not provided to a claimant or were provided in a substantially deficient manner.
  6. In the Towing Invoices, HTT and HITT sought consideration from Aviva for towing services in connection with claims under contracts of insurance. These towing services were either not provided or only partially provided.
  7. In the Repair Invoices, 24/7 Auto sought consideration from Aviva for repair services in connection with claims under contracts of insurance. These repair services were not provided as claimed by 24/7 Auto on the Repair Invoices. There were items that were not replaced, items that were repaired instead of being replaced, and substantially deficient repairs.
  8. As the owner and sole director and officer of 24/7 Auto, HTT, and HITT, Hussain was the directing mind of those entities. Hussain’s conduct could have reasonably been expected to result in 24/7 Auto, HTT, and HITT submitting invoices to Aviva for services that were either not performed, only partially completed, or completed inadequately.
  9. The Director is satisfied that Hussain, 24/7 Auto, HTT, and HITT, committed a UDAP by invoicing Aviva for towing and repair services that were either not provided or not provided as claimed.

IV. GROUNDS FOR IMPOSING COMPLIANCE ORDER

  1. Section 441(1) of the Act provides that upon examination or investigation, or upon any other evidence, the Chief Executive Officer shall make a report if they are of the opinion that a person has committed or is committing any act, or has pursued or is pursuing any course of conduct, that is an unfair or deceptive act or practice or might reasonably be expected to result in a state of affairs that would constitute an unfair or deceptive act or practice.
  2. Section 441(2)(b) of the Act provides that the Chief Executive Officer may order the person identified in the report to cease engaging in the business of insurance or any aspect of the business of insurance specified by the Chief Executive Officer, after giving notice in writing.
  3. Given the evidence described in Schedule “A” to this Notice of Proposal, the Director is of the opinion that Hussain, 24/7 Auto, HTT, and 2551662 Ontario Inc. committed acts or pursued courses of conduct that constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices, or might reasonably be expected to result in a state of affairs that would constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices, under the Act. Specifically, Hussain, through 24/7 Auto, HTT, and 2551662 Ontario Inc. charged Aviva for towing and repair services which were not provided or only partially provided and for replacement parts that were not replaced.
  4. The false billing persisted from June 2022 to May 2023 across numerous invoices and multiple clients. Accordingly, the Director is further satisfied that Hussain, 24/7 Auto, HTT, and 2551662 Ontario Inc. will continue to engage in activities that will result in further unfair or deceptive acts or practices if the proposed order is not issued.
  5. The order is appropriate to protect the public, insurers, and maintain confidence in the regulatory regime under the Act.
  6. The Director is therefore satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to impose the compliance order described in this Notice of Proposal.

II. GROUNDS FOR IMPOSING ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES

  1. The Director is satisfied that imposing administrative penalties on Hussain, 24/7 Auto Collision Inc., and HITT under section 441.3(1) of the Act will satisfy one or both of the following purposes under section 441.2(1) of the Act:
    1. To promote compliance with the requirements established under the Act.
    2. To prevent a person from deriving, directly or indirectly, any economic benefit as a result of contravening or failing to comply with a requirement established under this Act.
  2. The Director is satisfied that one administrative penalty of $20,000 should be imposed on Hussain, two administrative penalties totalling $15,000 should be imposed on 24/7 Auto Collision Inc., and one administrative penalty of $2,500 should be imposed on HITT for engaging in UDAPs contrary to section 439 of the Act.
  3. In determining the amount of the administrative penalty, the Director has considered the following criteria as required by section 4(2) of Ontario Regulation 408/12:
    1. The degree to which the contravention or failure was intentional, reckless or negligent.
    2. The extent of the harm or potential harm to others resulting from the contravention or failure.
    3. The extent to which the person or entity tried to mitigate any loss or take other remedial action.
    4. The extent to which the person or entity derived or reasonably might have expected to derive, directly or indirectly, any economic benefit from the contravention or failure.
    5. Any other contraventions or failures to comply with a requirement established under the Act or with any other financial services legislation of Ontario or of any jurisdiction during the preceding five years by the person or entity.
  4. In respect of the first criterion, the Director is satisfied that 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain’s conduct was either intentional or reckless.
  5. Over the span of almost a year, 24/7 Auto, HTT, and HITT submitted numerous invoices for services that were not performed. The repeated submission of false invoices suggests an intentional pattern of conduct.
  6. At best, 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain were reckless and failed to ensure the accuracy of the invoices they submitted to Aviva.
  7. Hussain stated that there was no one at 24/7 Auto that was responsible for verifying the accuracy of invoices. This lack of review and oversight demonstrates recklessness and an indifference to submitting accurate invoices to insurers.
  8. In respect of the second criterion, the Director is satisfied that 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain caused harm or potential harm to others. Hussain and 24/7 Auto caused potential harm to their clients by providing deficient repairs. NAS found that there were safety concerns with the repairs performed by 24/7 Auto on three of the vehicles.
  9. The conduct caused significant harm to the insurance industry. Insurers rely on accurate information to assess claims, determine appropriate payouts, and manage overall costs. The submission of false information to insurers forces insurers to expend resources investigating claims and litigating disputes, contributing to higher overall costs for consumers.
  10. Hussain also caused economic harm to Aviva by charging Aviva, through 24/7 Auto, approximately $11,339.52 in the Repair Invoices for replacing items that were not replaced and repairing items instead of replacing them.
  11. In respect of the third criterion, the Director is unaware of any steps taken by 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain to remedy the contraventions described in this proposal.
  12. In respect of the fourth criterion, the Director is satisfied that 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain expected to derive, and did derive, direct economic benefit from submitting the Towing and Repair Invoices to Aviva, including the value received for replacing items that were not replaced, in the amount of approximately $9,714.15.
  13. In respect of the fifth criterion, the Director is unaware of any further contraventions or failures to comply with a requirement under the Act or with any other financial services legislation in Ontario or of any jurisdiction during the preceding five years by 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, or Hussain.
  14. Such further and other reasons as may come to my attention.

DATED at Toronto, Ontario, April 13, 2026

Original signed by

Elissa Sinha
Director, Litigation and Enforcement

By delegated authority from the Chief Executive Officer


SCHEDULE “A”
REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I. INTRODUCTION

  1. The Director, by delegated authority from the Chief Executive Officer, is of the opinion that 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain are committing acts or pursuing a course of conduct that constitutes an unfair or deceptive act or practice under the Act. This is the Director’s report pursuant to section 441 of the Act.

FACTS

  1. The Director is satisfied of the facts as outlined in the Notice of Proposal, above.
  2. Hussain is the owner of 24/7 Auto, HTT and HITT.
  3. 24/7 Auto is an auto repair shop.
  4. HTT and HITT are towing companies.
  5. 24/7 Auto, HTT, HITT, and Hussain are not licenced under the Act.
  6. From June 2022 to May 2023, HTT, HITT, and 24/7 Auto submitted numerous invoices (the “Towing Invoices” and “Repair Invoices” respectively) to Aviva for services that were not provided as indicated on the Towing and Repair Invoices.
  7. Aviva obtained statements from their clients which showed that the Towing Invoices charged Aviva for towing services that were not provided or only partially provided.
  8. Aviva also obtained appraisals of the vehicles which showed that the Repair Invoices charged Aviva for repair services that were either not performed, only partially completed, or completed inadequately.

III. UNFAIR OR DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES

  1. Section 439 of the Act states that no person shall engage in an unfair or deceptive act or practice. Section 438 of the Act defines unfair or deceptive act or practice as any activity or failure to act that is prescribed by the Authority rules as an unfair or deceptive act or practice.
  2. Section 6(1) of the Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices Rule (“UDAP Rule”) states that it is an unfair or deceptive act or practice for consideration to be sought for goods or services in connection with a claim under a contract of insurance which were not provided to a claimant or were provided in a substantially deficient manner.
  3. HTT and HITT sought consideration from Aviva for towing services in connection with claims under contracts of insurance. These towing services were either not provided or partially provided, as the client statements obtained by Aviva confirmed.
  4. 24/7 Auto sought consideration from Aviva for repair services in connection with claims under contracts of insurance. These repair services were not provided as claimed by 24/7 Auto on the Repair Invoices. Appraisals on the vehicles confirmed that there were items that were not replaced, items that were repaired instead of being replaced, and deficient repairs.

SCHEDULE “B”
Towing Invoices

Towing Invoices
Invoice Invoice Submitted By Insured Date Amount Billed Towing Services Claimed
Towing Invoice 1 HTT AS June 18, 2022 $476.52 Tow to the address of 24/7 Auto
Towing Invoice 2 HITT PS March 25, 2023 $713.31 Tow from Brampton to a Collision Reporting Center the day following the collision
Towing Invoice 3 HTT KR May 15, 2023 $1342.44 Tow from the scene of the accident to a Collision Reporting Center followed by a Tow to the address of HTT

SCHEDULE “C”
Repair Invoices

Repair Invoices
Invoice Insured Date Repair Services Claimed Issues Identified by NAS Value of Items Billed for but not Replaced / Improperly Repaired Corrective Repair Cost Amount Paid by Aviva to 24/7 Auto
Repair Invoice 1 SS June 24, 2022 Repairs claimed to match estimate from Aviva Multiple items not replaced, deficient repairs, safety concerns with repairs $1,625.37 $11,131.64 $0
Repair Invoice 2 AB January 17, 2023 Repairs claimed to match estimate from Aviva Multiple items not replaced, safety concerns with repairs $1,738.52 $6,114.75 $13,299.46
Repair Invoice 3 SG August 24, 2022 Repairs claimed to match estimate from Aviva Items were repaired instead of being replaced $1,372.52 $3,058.88 $6,910.98
Repair Invoice 4 NC January 20, 2023 Repairs claimed to match estimate from Aviva Multiple items not replaced, items were repaired instead of being replaced, $2,204.86 $710.50 $11,000
Repair Invoice 5 AK December 2, 2022 Repairs claimed to match estimate from Aviva Multiple items not replaced $2,836.35 $9,266.41 $12,259.70
Repair Invoice 6 CM January 24, 2023 Repairs claimed to match estimate from Aviva Multiple items not replaced, safety concerns with repairs $1,561.90 $11,996.79 $8,928.89
Total         $11,339.52 $42,278.97 $52,399.03

Si vous desirez recevoir cet avis en français, veuillez nous envoyer votre demande par courriel immediatement a : contactcentre@fsrao.ca.