The respondent insurer requested a reconsideration of a decision finding the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment and was entitled to attendant care benefits (ACBs) for services provided by his spouse.
The insurer argued the adjudicator erred by admitting opinion evidence on causation from a treating chiropractor who was not qualified as an expert, and by awarding ACBs for care provided by a family member.
The Associate Chair denied the reconsideration, holding that the chiropractor's evidence was admissible as a 'participant expert' under Westerhof, and that the spouse, a trained personal support worker and registered practical nurse, provided the attendant care services in the course of her profession.
The adjudicator's findings that the applicant promised to pay his spouse and required overnight supervision were reasonable and did not constitute significant errors of law or fact.
