Dr. H. Waiser

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

The respondent denied treatment plans for psychological services and assessments, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant did not prove an accident-related psychological impairment or chronic pain syndrome with functional impairment that would warrant removal from the MIG, preferring the respondent's section 44 assessors over the applicant's assessors due to inconsistencies with contemporaneous clinical records.

However, pursuant to section 40(8) of the Schedule, the disputed benefits were deemed reasonable and necessary up to the remaining $3,500 MIG limit.

The Applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming psychological impairments that would remove him from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to prove he sustained a psychological injury as a result of the accident, preferring the insurer's psychological assessment over the Applicant's evidence, which was given little weight.

Consequently, the Applicant's injuries were deemed minor and subject to the MIG's $3,500 funding limit.

The claims for physiotherapy, a psychological assessment, interest, and an award for unreasonable delay were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for a psychological assessment and chiropractic treatment.

The respondent insurer denied the treatment plans following insurer's examinations.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove the treatment and assessment plans were reasonable and necessary, noting a lack of compelling contemporaneous medical evidence and preferring the respondent's expert reports which indicated minimal psychological and physical impairment.

The application was dismissed and no interest was payable.