Annemarie N. White

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

The respondent denied medical benefits on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The adjudicator found that the applicant's injuries, which included radiculopathy and possible myeloradiculopathy as noted by the respondent's own neurological assessor, exhibited neurological signs that removed him from the MIG.

The adjudicator approved two physiotherapy treatment plans, finding one reasonable and necessary for pain relief, and the other payable because the respondent failed to provide adequate medical reasons for its denial under s. 38(8) of the Schedule.

An attendant care needs assessment was also approved.

However, the applicant's claim for a special award under Regulation 664 was dismissed as there was insufficient evidence that the respondent acted unreasonably.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule after being removed from the Minor Injury Guideline.

The insurer denied treatment plans for a cognitive assessment, chiropractic and massage treatments, and the remaining cost of a partially approved psychological assessment.

The Tribunal found the cognitive assessment and physical treatments were reasonable and necessary given the applicant's reported concussion symptoms and ongoing chronic pain.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the claim for the remaining cost of the psychological assessment, finding the applicant failed to prove why the additional time and cost were necessary beyond the insurer's partial approval.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent insurer determined the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and refused to fund treatment plans exceeding the $3,500 limit.

The applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, arguing that pre-existing conditions, psychological injuries, and chronic pain warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient medical evidence to support removal from the MIG, noting that the psychological report's conclusions were unsupported by its own psychometric testing and uncorroborated by other medical records.

The application was dismissed, and the disputed treatment plans were denied as the MIG funding limit had been exhausted.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued she should be removed from the MIG due to a pre-existing cervical spine condition, psychological impairments, and chronic pain.

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not provide compelling evidence that her pre-existing condition prevented her from achieving maximum medical recovery within the MIG.

Furthermore, the Tribunal found insufficient evidence of psychological impairment or chronic pain caused by the accident.

The application for a $2,200 psychological assessment and interest was dismissed, as the injuries were deemed predominantly minor.