Dr. N. Harmantas

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a rear-end motor vehicle collision.

The respondent insurer denied multiple treatment plans for chiropractic care, assistive devices including a tablet and mattress, and various medical assessments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant's ongoing complaints were attributable to pre-existing degenerative changes rather than the accident.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's assessors, concluding that the proposed goods and services were not reasonable and necessary.

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

The respondent classified the applicant's injuries as minor and subject to the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and its $3,500 funding limit, denying several treatment and assessment plans.

The applicant argued she suffered from chronic pain and psychological injuries outside the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant's physical injuries were minor and her ongoing pain was related to a pre-existing condition (polymyalgia rheumatica), not the accident.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's medical experts over the applicant's assessor, concluding the applicant did not sustain accident-related chronic pain or psychological impairments.

The application was dismissed, and no interest or award was granted.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including income replacement benefits (IRBs) and various medical treatment plans.

The insurer initially placed the applicant in the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied several treatment plans, later removing her from the MIG for psychological impairments but terminating IRBs based on insurer examinations.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant was not entitled to further IRBs, as she did not suffer a substantial inability to perform her essential tasks as an Uber driver, noting she was enrolled in a full-time massage therapy program.

The Tribunal upheld the insurer's denial of most treatment plans under s. 38(5) of the Schedule, but approved one physiotherapy plan and the balance of a psychological assessment.

Claims for an award for unreasonable delay were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement benefits (IRBs) and medical benefits from her insurer.

The insurer initially classified her injuries under the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied several treatment plans, later removing her from the MIG for psychological impairments but terminating IRBs based on insurer examinations.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant was not entitled to further IRBs, as she failed to prove a substantial inability to perform her essential tasks as an Uber driver, noting she was enrolled in a full-time massage therapy program.

The Tribunal upheld the insurer's denial of early treatment plans under section 38(5) of the Schedule but approved one physiotherapy plan and the balance of a psychological assessment, along with applicable interest.

The claim for an award for unreasonable delay was dismissed.

The applicant sought payment for two physiotherapy treatment plans following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the plans on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and were subject to the $3,500 cap.

The applicant argued she suffered chronic pain and psychological damage taking her outside the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that her injuries were more than predominantly minor, preferring the objective clinical notes of her family physician over her chiropractor's records.

The application for benefits was dismissed.