Dr. Brett Dunlop

The applicant was seriously injured in a motorcycle accident and received income replacement benefits until the insurer terminated them in March 2010.

The applicant sought ongoing benefits, arguing he was completely unable to engage in suitable employment until he completed computer repair training.

The insurer relied on surveillance and medical assessments to argue he could return to light sedentary work.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's completion of high school equivalency and demonstrated ability to sit for extended periods during commutes and classes indicated he was capable of resuming sedentary office work by September 2012.

Income replacement benefits were awarded for the closed period from March 2010 to September 2012.

The claim for a special award was dismissed, as the insurer's reliance on surveillance to terminate benefits was reasonable.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement benefits (IRBs) after the insurer terminated them.

The insurer argued the applicant's pain complaints were not credible and lacked objective medical evidence.

The arbitrator found the applicant to be a credible witness whose testimony was corroborated by lay witnesses and medical professionals.

The arbitrator concluded the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform his pre-accident employment and a complete inability to engage in any employment for which he is reasonably suited.

The applicant was awarded pre-104 week and post-104 week IRBs, interest, and arbitration expenses.