Dr. Christopher Abeare

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's denial of several treatment plans for chiropractic and psychological services, travel expenses, and a claim for an award for unreasonable delay.

The Tribunal found the chiropractic and two psychological treatment plans to be reasonable and necessary, preferring the evidence of the applicant's treating physicians over the insurer's examiners.

The claim for travel expenses was denied as it did not meet the statutory criteria for emergency transportation, and one psychological treatment plan was denied because it was not submitted into evidence.

The Tribunal also denied the request for a special award, finding no unreasonable delay by the respondent, but awarded interest on the overdue benefits.

The applicant sought entitlement to statutory accident benefits for a neuro-optometric assessment and occupational therapy services following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the treatment plans, relying on insurer's examinations which concluded the applicant's ongoing symptoms were related to pre-existing conditions rather than the accident.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet her burden of proving the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary, noting a lack of corroborating medical evidence and significant pre-existing health issues.

The application was dismissed.