Deepali Dhawan

The applicant sought entitlement to statutory accident benefits for vision therapy, occupational therapy, a therapeutic mattress, and a psychological assessment following a 2019 motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed all claims, finding that the applicant failed to prove the treatments and assessments were reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's insurer examination reports, which concluded that the proposed vision therapy lacked validated efficacy and that the applicant had the functional ability to perform pre-accident activities without the proposed occupational therapy.

Claims for interest and an award for unreasonable delay were also dismissed.

The applicant sought attendant care benefits and funding for chiropractic services following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the claims.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove the attendant care expenses were incurred pursuant to s. 3(7)(e) of the Schedule, and medical evidence indicated she had returned to her personal care and housekeeping tasks.

The Tribunal also denied the treatment plan for chiropractic services, finding the cost excessive and the treatment not reasonable and necessary given the applicant's pre-existing conditions and lack of functional improvement from past treatments.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including attendant care and various medical and rehabilitation benefits.

The respondent denied the benefits, and the applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was not entitled to ongoing attendant care benefits, as the medical evidence demonstrated he was mostly independent in his activities of daily living and failed to prove the expenses were incurred.

The Tribunal granted one physiotherapy treatment plan for $4,022.42, finding it reasonable and necessary for pain reduction, despite the respondent's argument that the injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline.

The remaining claims for further treatment, assessments, and treatment provider mileage were dismissed as they were either duplicative, not reasonable and necessary, or not payable under the Schedule.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied certain treatment plans, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that while the applicant's physical injuries were minor, she suffered from a psychological impairment (anxiety related to driving) that warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal approved a $2,460.00 psychological assessment but denied an attendant care assessment, finding the applicant was independent in her daily activities.

A claim for an award under O. Reg. 664 for unreasonable delay was also dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including income replacement, housekeeping, and attendant care benefits.

The insurer terminated these benefits based on insurer examinations.

The arbitrator found that the applicant remained substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident employment, noting the insurer failed to properly adjust the file when advised the applicant had not returned to work.

The arbitrator awarded income replacement benefits, partial housekeeping and attendant care benefits, and a $5,000 special award against the insurer for unreasonably withholding benefits.