Dr. Bernard Woolford

The Applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought Income Replacement Benefits (IRBs) and Housekeeping and Home Maintenance Benefits from the Insurer.

The Insurer denied the claims.

At arbitration, the Applicant claimed he was self-employed prior to the accident and suffered a substantial inability to work and perform housekeeping tasks.

The Arbitrator found the Applicant's testimony lacked credibility and that he failed to provide sufficient evidence of pre-accident business income, as his tax returns showed only passive investment income.

Furthermore, medical evidence did not establish that his injuries were caused by the accident rather than extensive pre-existing conditions.

The Arbitrator dismissed the claims for IRBs, housekeeping benefits, and interest, finding the Applicant failed to meet his burden of proof.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following two motor vehicle accidents in 2007.

The arbitrator found the applicant's evidence to be unreliable due to poor recall and contradictions with documentary evidence, including Ontario Works records showing he had returned to work.

Relying on the medical evidence, particularly the applicant's orthopaedic surgeon, the arbitrator concluded the applicant suffered a complete inability to engage in suitable employment for a limited period.

The applicant was awarded income replacement benefits from July 7, 2009, to August 1, 2010, but his claims for various assessment costs and a special award were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits until the insurer terminated her income replacement benefits.

The applicant claimed ongoing entitlement due to physical pain and severe psychological impairments, including panic disorder and claustrophobia, which prevented her from using elevators, public transit, or driving.

The arbitrator found the applicant to be a credible witness and accepted the evidence of her treating psychiatrist, family doctor, and a vocational assessor over the insurer's DAC assessors.

The arbitrator concluded that the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment for the first 104 weeks, and a complete inability to engage in any suitable employment thereafter.

The insurer was ordered to pay ongoing income replacement benefits.