Edward Langley

The applicant sought entitlement to statutory accident benefits for psychological, orthopaedic, neurological, and chronic pain assessments following a 2018 motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to prove the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal noted significant, unexplained gaps of over four years between the accident, the cessation of initial treatments, and the submission of the disputed assessment plans.

As no benefits were payable, claims for interest and a special award were also dismissed.

The applicant, a minor injured in a motor vehicle accident, sought various statutory accident benefits that were denied by the respondent insurer.

The Tribunal found the applicant was entitled to treatment plans for psychological services, occupational therapy, a neuropsychological assessment (subject to the $2,000 statutory cap), and other goods and services including karate and skating lessons.

The Tribunal denied the claim for physiotherapy services, finding the reported pain was psychosomatic and decreasing.

The Tribunal also awarded $2,000 under section 10 of Regulation 664, finding the respondent unreasonably delayed and withheld benefits by ignoring medical recommendations and failing to provide ordered productions.

The applicant sought entitlement to statutory accident benefits for physiotherapy, hearing aids, and neuro-visual therapy following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the disputed treatment plans were reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's medical assessors, who concluded that the applicant had reached maximum medical recovery for soft tissue injuries, had normal audiogram results, and showed no ophthalmic sequela related to the accident.

As no benefits were payable, the claim for interest was also dismissed.

The applicant sought accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent held the applicant within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied treatment plans for psychological services and a neurological assessment.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that her injuries warranted removal from the MIG, as there was insufficient medical evidence of a pre-existing condition or functional impairment precluding recovery within the MIG limit.

The treatment plans were therefore not payable beyond the $3,500 limit.

The respondent's request for costs was denied.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to treatment plans for chiropractic services, a chronic pain assessment, and a functional cognitive assessment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the proposed treatment plans were reasonable and necessary.

The applicant's evidence was insufficient, and medical reports indicated no ongoing accident-related impairments warranting the assessments.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming his physical and psychological injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The adjudicator found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor soft tissue strains, relying on the respondent's independent medical examination and the applicant's own family doctor records.

The applicant failed to provide compelling evidence of chronic pain or psychological impairment sufficient to justify removal from the MIG.

Consequently, the claims for treatment plans exceeding the $3,500 MIG limit and for an award were dismissed.