Dr. R. Moola

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

The respondent denied treatment plans for psychological services and assessments, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant did not prove an accident-related psychological impairment or chronic pain syndrome with functional impairment that would warrant removal from the MIG, preferring the respondent's section 44 assessors over the applicant's assessors due to inconsistencies with contemporaneous clinical records.

However, pursuant to section 40(8) of the Schedule, the disputed benefits were deemed reasonable and necessary up to the remaining $3,500 MIG limit.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming physical and psychological impairments, including chronic pain, that warranted treatment beyond the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries were predominantly soft-tissue sprains and strains falling within the MIG.

The Tribunal rejected the applicant's psychological evidence as it was based wholly on self-reporting without psychometric testing, and found insufficient evidence to establish chronic pain under the AMA Guides criteria.

The application was dismissed, and the disputed treatment plans and interest were denied.