OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Order insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed with $10 costs.
Plaintiff, a health care provider, seeking to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by the submission of a complete proof of claim and the amount of the loss ( see Insurance Law § 5106 [a]; Mary Immaculate Hosp. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 5 AD3d 742; Amaze Med. Supply v. Eagle Ins. Co., 2 Misc 3d 128[A], 2003 NY Slip Op 51701[U] [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2003]). Defendant failed to deny the claim within the statutory 30-day claim determination period (11 NYCRR 65.15 [g] [3]). Defendant's requests for examinations under oath did not toll the 30-day period, inasmuch as the insurance regulation in effect at the time plaintiff submitted its claim did not contain a provision requiring a claimant to appear for an examination under oath ( see A.B. Med. Servs. PLLC v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 2003 NY Slip Op 51392[U] [App Term, 2d 11th Jud Dists 2003]). Accordingly, defendant is precluded from raising most defenses ( see Presbyterian Hosp. in City of N.Y. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 90 NY2d 274, 282).
However, an untimely denial does not preclude a defendant from asserting the defense that the collision was a staged event in furtherance of an insurance fraud scheme ( see Matter of Metro Med. Diagnostics v. Eagle Ins. Co., 293 AD2d 751). The investigator's affidavit set forth sufficient facts to demonstrate that defendant possessed a "founded belief that the alleged injur[ies] do not arise out of an insured incident" ( Central Gen. Hosp. v. Chubb Group of Ins. Cos., 90 NY2d 195, 199). As a result, because defendant demonstrated the existence of a triable issue of fact as to whether there was a lack of coverage ( see id.), plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was properly denied.