Recitation, as required by CPLR §2219(a), of the papers considered in the review of this motion: Papers Numbered Notices of Motion and Affidavits Annexed 1 Order to Show Cause and Affidavits Annexed Answering Affidavits and Memorandum of Law 2 Reply Memorandum of Law 3 Exhibits Other DECISION/ORDER Plaintiff commenced this action by summons and complaint on March 5, 2018 to recover the sum of $1,607.40 for services provided to its assignor Dianna Beltran. Defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (“defendant” or “MVAIC”) now moves for summary judgment dismissing this action based upon the assignor’s purported ineligibility for MVAIC benefits under Article 52 of the New York Insurance Law. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On September 20, 2016, Beltran was hit by a car (the “Striking Vehicle”) while crossing the street (Pollack Affirm., Ex. E [Police Report]). On November 1, 2016 Beltran sought treatment from plaintiff for injuries resulting from the accident (Compl. at 11). On or around October 18, 2016, Beltran sent MVAIC an Application for No-Fault Benefits (Pollack Affirm., Ex D), a police accident report for the September 20, 2016 accident (Pollack Affirm., Ex. E), and proof of Beltran’s New York state residency (Pollak Affirm., Ex. F). On October 21, 2016, MVAIC received a Notice of Intention to Make Claim (“NOI”) for assignor, Beltran (Pollak Affirm., Ex. G). The NOI indicated that the Striking Vehicle was registered in Utah with license plate C020YK. The police accident report also included this license plate number for the Striking Vehicle (Pollak Affirm., Ex. E). On October 28, 2016, MVAIC sent a coverage request letter to Beltran’s counsel, requesting, as relevant here, written confirmation as to whether the Striking Vehicle had insurance (Pollak Affirm,. Ex. I) A second coverage request seeking this information was issued on November 28, 2016 (Id.). A third coverage request seeking this information was sent on December 28, 2016 (Id.). On January 30, 2017, a fourth coverage request was sent requesting this information (Id.). On December 15, 2016, MVAIC received a bill from plaintiff in the amount of $1,607.40 for service rendered on November 1, 2016 (Pollak Affirm., Ex. C). On December 27, 2016, MVAIC issued another coverage request letter and, after received no response, a final coverage request letter on February 1, 2017 (Pollack Affirm., Ex. C). On March 22, 2017, MVAIC issued a letter to Beltran and her known providers, advising that Beltran had not yet established that she was a “covered person” under Article 52 of the Insurance Law and that written verifiable confirmation of the insurance or lack of insurance for the Striking Vehicle was outstanding (Pollak Affirm., Ex. K). In support of its motion defendant submits, inter alia, the affidavit of one its qualification examiners, Tarik Pollins, which details MVAICs practices and procedures in sending out coverage request letters and receiving and reviewing mail (Pollins Aff. at
