Barney Brucker

The Applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while riding his motorcycle and sought statutory accident benefits.

The Insurer terminated his weekly disability benefits, prompting the Applicant to apply for arbitration.

The Applicant claimed he was employed "under the table" at the time of the accident and thus qualified for income benefits under section 12 of the Schedule.

The Arbitrator found the Applicant's evidence regarding his employment lacked credibility and concluded he was not employed at the time of the accident.

Furthermore, the Arbitrator determined the Applicant was not entitled to non-earner benefits under section 13, as he was able to perform the bulk of his pre-accident activities of daily living.

The application was dismissed, and the Applicant was denied his arbitration expenses due to the lack of merit in his case.

The applicant was injured in a motorcycle accident and received weekly income benefits until the insurer terminated them.

The applicant applied for arbitration to dispute the termination, claiming ongoing disability due to a fractured leg and subsequent knee complications.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's delayed recovery and left knee problems were related to the accident.

The arbitrator concluded the applicant was substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of his employment until May 23, 1995, and ordered the insurer to pay weekly income benefits for that period, plus interest and expenses.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received weekly income benefits for over 156 weeks.

The insurer terminated benefits, arguing the applicant did not meet the stricter post-156 week test of being continuously prevented from engaging in any occupation for which he is reasonably suited by education, training, or experience.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant had chronic injuries preventing heavy physical work, he was capable of performing lighter or sedentary work consistent with his education and experience.

The arbitrator concluded the applicant's failure to pursue such work was due to a lifestyle choice rather than physical restrictions.

The application for ongoing benefits was dismissed, but the applicant was awarded expenses.

The applicant was injured in a motorcycle accident and sought no-fault benefits to retrain as a commercial airline pilot, arguing he could no longer work as a truck driver due to knee injuries.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had successfully returned to work as a truck driver for a trial period and failed to provide medical evidence showing he could not continue in that occupation.

The arbitrator concluded that retraining as a pilot was not a reasonable expense resulting from the accident and dismissed the claim for occupational training benefits.