Dr. Leon Treger

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a previous Licence Appeal Tribunal decision which found she was not removed from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) following a motor vehicle accident.

The applicant argued the Tribunal erred in its assessment of her psychological and temporomandibular joint impairments, as well as the impact of her pre-existing conditions under section 18(2) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The Vice-Chair dismissed the request, finding that the applicant was attempting to re-litigate the weighing of evidence rather than demonstrating an error of law or fact under Rule 18.2(b).

As no benefits were found owing, the claims for an income replacement benefit, an award, and interest were also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to income replacement benefits, various treatment plans, and removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to psychological and temporomandibular joint (TMJ) impairments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove her injuries warranted removal from the MIG, noting inconsistencies in her reporting of the TMJ injury and a lack of medical evidence supporting a psychological impairment.

The claim for income replacement benefits was also dismissed as the applicant did not demonstrate a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment.

All claims were dismissed.

The applicant sought a determination of catastrophic impairment and entitlement to income replacement benefits (IRB), attendant care benefits (ACB), and various treatment plans following a 2018 motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found the applicant did not meet the 55% whole person impairment threshold under Criterion 7, concluding his combined physical and mental impairment rating was 40%.

The Tribunal also found the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to engage in suitable employment, dismissing the claim for post-104-week IRB.

As the applicant was not catastrophically impaired and had exhausted non-catastrophic limits, the claims for ACB and treatment plans were also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing his injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain, psychological impairments, and TMJ disorders.

He also claimed income replacement benefits (IRB) and various treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove his injuries fell outside the MIG, noting a lack of supporting medical evidence for chronic pain or psychological impairment.

The Tribunal also dismissed the IRB claim, finding the applicant's unemployment was due to the end of a seasonal contract rather than accident-related impairments.

The application was dismissed in its entirety.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and sought a medical benefit of $2,195.00 for a temporomandibular joint (TMJ) assessment.

The respondent insurer denied the treatment plan, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline and relying on an insurer's examination that found no TMJ disorder.

The Tribunal preferred the applicant's medical evidence, noting that the applicant had sustained broken teeth in the accident and that the treating dentist's assessment was more thorough than the insurer's examination.

The Tribunal found the TMJ assessment to be reasonable and necessary, and ordered the respondent to pay the benefit with interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to treatment plans for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) treatment, a TMJ assessment, and psychological services.

The adjudicator dismissed the claims for TMJ treatment and assessment, finding the applicant failed to prove the dental injuries were caused by the subject accident rather than a prior collision.

The adjudicator partially granted the claim for psychological services, awarding $2,000.00 based on an appropriate hourly rate for a social worker, plus interest on the overdue amount.

The applicant's claim for an award under Regulation 664 for unreasonably withheld payments was dismissed, as the insurer's conduct was not found to be excessive or imprudent.