Dr. M. Boucher

The applicant sought $12,580.00 for a multidisciplinary chronic pain program following a 2015 motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the treatment plan, arguing the applicant's current pain complaints were not accident-related and she had reached maximum medical recovery.

The Tribunal found the proposed program lacked specificity and the applicant failed to prove it was reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal also noted inconsistencies in the applicant's reporting of her injuries and preferred the respondent's medical evidence, which concluded the applicant had achieved maximum medical improvement.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that only the physiotherapy treatment plan was reasonable and necessary, relying on the recommendation of the applicant's family physician.

The remaining claims for massage therapy, chiropractic treatment, occupational therapy, a qEEG assessment, and various other expenses were denied due to insufficient medical evidence or because they were incurred prior to the submission of a treatment plan.

The Tribunal also awarded the applicant 10% of the amounts withheld for two psychological treatment plans, finding that the respondent unreasonably delayed funding despite having sufficient evidence to approve them.