3 total
Accident benefits denied; applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline and IRB claim unsupported.
The Applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a rear-end motor vehicle collision.
The Respondent denied the benefits, arguing the Applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).
The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to prove she suffered from an accident-related psychological injury or chronic pain condition that would remove her from the MIG.
Consequently, the disputed treatment plans were denied as they fell outside the MIG limit.
The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for income replacement benefits, drawing an adverse inference from the Applicant's failure to produce her employment and employment insurance files.
Claims for interest and a section 10 award were also dismissed.
Insurer ordered to fund chiropractic, psychological, and orthopedic assessments for applicant with chronic pain syndrome.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2018 motor vehicle accident.
The respondent insurer denied funding for chiropractic treatment, the unapproved balance of a psychological treatment plan, and an orthopedic assessment.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's ongoing pain complaints and functional impairments, supported by medical records and an orthopedic assessment diagnosing chronic pain syndrome, justified the disputed treatment plans.
The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the full amounts for the chiropractic treatment and orthopedic assessment, a partial amount for the psychological treatment plan, and interest on overdue payments.
Application for accident benefits dismissed; psychological claims rejected due to malingering and injuries capped by MIG.
The applicant sought accident benefits for psychological injuries following a motor vehicle accident, arguing they fell outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and subject to the $3,500 MIG limit, preferring the respondent's neuropsychological assessment which found evidence of malingering over the applicant's psychological report.
The Tribunal dismissed the claims for a psychological assessment and treatment plan, finding the assessment costs were incurred prematurely and the treatment was not reasonable and necessary.
Claims for an award and interest were also dismissed.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.