Dr. Chad Hefford

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to a chronic pain assessment and removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish chronic pain with functional impairment or a psychological condition warranting removal from the MIG, preferring the respondent's section 44 multidisciplinary assessments over the applicant's expert reports.

As the applicant remained subject to the MIG, the disputed treatment plan was not considered, and claims for interest and a section 10 award were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a non-earner benefit (NEB), a functional abilities assessment, and a chronic pain assessment.

The Tribunal found the respondent failed to comply with a production order regarding the NEB denial letter and drew an adverse inference, concluding the respondent failed to provide proper notice under s. 36(4) of the Schedule.

Consequently, the NEB was payable under s. 36(6).

The Tribunal denied the functional abilities assessment, finding the applicant's physical condition did not limit his daily tasks or employment.

However, the Tribunal approved the chronic pain assessment based on consistent reports of ongoing pain.

Claims for an award and costs were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the insurer's determination that her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant claimed entitlement to a non-earner benefit, various treatment plans, and removal from the MIG due to pre-existing conditions, psychological impairments, and chronic pain syndrome.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish that her pre-existing conditions precluded recovery within the MIG, nor did she prove accident-related psychological impairments or chronic pain syndrome.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for a non-earner benefit, finding insufficient evidence of a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

As the applicant remained in the MIG and the limits were exhausted, the disputed treatment plans were denied.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for physiotherapy and a chronic pain assessment.

The respondent insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant had reached maximum medical recovery.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant continued to suffer from ongoing impairments and had not reached maximum medical recovery.

The Tribunal held that both the physiotherapy treatment and the chronic pain assessment were reasonable and necessary.

The applicant was awarded the disputed benefits and interest, but her claim for a special award for unreasonable delay was dismissed due to a lack of evidence.