Dr. D. E. Mula

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident where he was allegedly struck as a pedestrian.

The insurer determined his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied further treatment plans and Income Replacement Benefits (IRBs).

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove his injuries fell outside the MIG, rejecting his claims of chronic pain and psychological injuries due to inconsistent medical evidence and uncompelling expert reports.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for IRBs, finding no credible link between the accident and the applicant's inability to work, as the medical evidence showed functional range of motion and no substantial impairment.

All claims were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including non-earner, attendant care, housekeeping, and medical benefits, which the insurer denied.

The arbitrator found the applicant credible and concluded she suffered soft-tissue injuries that continuously prevented her from engaging in substantially all of her pre-accident activities, entitling her to non-earner benefits.

The arbitrator also awarded attendant care benefits for a limited period at a reduced rate, and housekeeping benefits for the claimed period, less a two-week vacation.

The insurer was ordered to pay for an approved treatment plan and two assessments, along with a special award for unreasonably withholding payment for the assessments, plus interest.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including non-earner, attendant care, housekeeping, and medical benefits.

The arbitrator found significant credibility issues with the applicant's evidence, noting inconsistencies and symptom magnification.

The claims for non-earner and housekeeping benefits were dismissed as the applicant failed to establish a complete or substantial inability to perform his pre-accident activities.

Attendant care benefits were granted for a limited one-month period.

The arbitrator also awarded the cost of an attendant care assessment, one treatment plan, and a special award due to the insurer's unreasonable delay in paying for the assessment.