Dr. J.M. Lacroix

The appellant appealed an arbitrator's decision denying his claim for income replacement benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The appellant claimed he had a legitimate contract of employment as a sales representative before the accident.

The Director's Delegate upheld the arbitrator's finding that the evidence did not establish a genuine employment contract, dismissing the income replacement claim.

However, the appeal was allowed in part to award the appellant the full $1,670 cost of a psycho-vocational assessment, finding it was a reasonable expense recommended by his treating doctors.

The insurer's cross-appeal for repayment of benefits was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in two motor vehicle accidents and claimed income replacement benefits based on an alleged written contract of employment as a sales representative, which he claimed was signed before the first accident.

The insurer terminated benefits, arguing the contract was not legitimate.

The arbitrator found that the alleged contract did not represent the true relationship between the parties, concluding the applicant was likely a subcontractor working on strict commission rather than a salaried employee.

Consequently, the claim for income replacement benefits under paragraph 7(1)3 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule was dismissed.

The arbitrator also reduced a claim for a $1,670 psychovocational assessment to $400, finding the full amount unreasonable.