Dave Rambukkana

The applicant sought $1,696.00 for a physiotherapy treatment plan following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent insurer denied the plan based on an Insurer's Examination by a physical medicine and rehabilitation specialist, who opined that active therapy and modalities like acupuncture or ultrasound would not provide rehabilitation benefits due to the applicant's pre-existing spinal fusion and pain, recommending aquatic therapy instead.

The Tribunal found the proposed treatment plan lacked details on the modalities to be used and how the goals would be achieved.

The Tribunal accepted the insurer's medical evidence and concluded the applicant failed to prove the treatment plan was reasonable and necessary.

The application was dismissed.