3 total
Application for accident benefits dismissed as injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
The respondent denied the benefits on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and the $3,500 limit had been exhausted.
The applicant argued for removal from the MIG due to pre-existing conditions, psychological impairment, and chronic pain.
The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence that a pre-existing condition precluded recovery within the MIG.
The Tribunal gave minimal weight to the psychological and chronic pain assessments provided by the applicant, noting they lacked document review or referenced a prior accident.
The application was dismissed.
Application for accident benefits dismissed; injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline due to lack of objective evidence.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2015 motor vehicle accident.
The respondent denied certain treatment plans and assessments, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).
The Tribunal found the applicant's credibility was undermined by his failure to report a subsequent 2016 accident and pre-existing pain to his expert assessors.
Preferring the respondent's physiatry and psychology experts over the applicant's, the Tribunal concluded the physical injuries were soft tissue strains and there was no diagnosable psychological impairment.
The Tribunal held the injuries were predominantly minor and the disputed treatment plans and assessments were not reasonable and necessary.
Accident benefits claim dismissed as injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline limits.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a rear-end motor vehicle collision.
The respondent denied several treatment plans for chiropractic and physiotherapy services on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).
The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered predominantly minor injuries, consisting of sprains and strains, and rejected the applicant's claim of chronic pain syndrome.
As the applicant failed to demonstrate that her impairments warranted removal from the MIG and the monetary limits had been exhausted, the claims for medical benefits, interest, and a punitive award were dismissed.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.