In Gomez v. Ford Motor Credit Co.,10 Misc 3d 900 (NY Sup 2005), in considering the sufficiency of an affidavit from a doctor who treated the plaintiff after the cessation of treatment, arising out of a claim that further treatment would be palliative, the court rationalized that similar scrutiny should be applied to the explanation that the gap or cessation of treatment occurred when no-fault benefits were discontinued. The court further noted that no additional evidence was provided, and at the very least, counsel for the plaintiff should have provided a letter from the insurance carrier as to when and why the carrier discontinued coverage. (Gomez v. Ford Motor Credit Co., supra.)