Dr. Ellick

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

The respondent denied several treatment plans on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued he should be removed from the MIG due to psychological impairments and chronic pain.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's psychological assessment, finding no psychological impairment, and concluded the applicant did not meet the AMA Guides criteria for chronic pain.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was found to be subject to the MIG funding limits.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a rear-end motor vehicle collision.

The respondent denied claims for non-earner benefits and various medical, psychological, and physiotherapy treatment plans on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life, noting she returned to full-time work and her self-reporting was inconsistent.

The Tribunal also held that the applicant's physical injuries fell within the MIG and rejected her claim of a psychological impairment, preferring the respondent's expert evidence which demonstrated significant symptom exaggeration and failed validity testing.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the treatment plans and claim for interest were dismissed.