Dr. R. Zarnett

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

The insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and its $3,500 funding limit.

The applicant argued she should be removed from the MIG due to pre-existing conditions, chronic pain, and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that her pre-existing conditions prevented maximal recovery within the MIG, or that she suffered from chronic pain or psychological impairments caused by the accident.

The application was dismissed, and no benefits or interest were awarded.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical benefits for chiropractic services.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and she had exhausted the $3,500 limit.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove she sustained non-minor injuries or had a pre-existing condition that prevented her recovery within the MIG limits.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a non-earner benefit and various medical and rehabilitation benefits.

The adjudicator found that the applicant did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as the applicant was able to live independently, care for a child, and maintain relationships.

The claims for most of the medical and rehabilitation benefits were dismissed because they were not reasonable and necessary, largely due to a lack of evidence of cognitive impairment.

However, one treatment plan for occupational therapy services to address psychological impairments and assist the applicant in obtaining a GED was approved.

The applicant was struck by a vehicle while walking across an intersection and sustained physical and psychological injuries.

The insurer terminated her income replacement benefits based on an orthopaedic assessment.

The applicant sought arbitration, arguing she suffered from chronic pain with a significant psychological component that prevented her from working.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was completely unable to engage in any employment for which she was reasonably suited, preferring the evidence of her psychological experts over the insurer's assessors.

The arbitrator also granted a special award, finding that the insurer unreasonably withheld benefits by misfiling and ignoring a key psychological report that supported her claim.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for caregiving, housekeeping, and medical expenses following a motor vehicle accident.

The arbitrator dismissed all claims, finding the applicant's evidence regarding her inability to perform caregiving and housekeeping tasks to be inconsistent, contradictory, and lacking credibility.

Surveillance evidence showed the applicant performing tasks she claimed to be unable to do.

The arbitrator preferred the medical evidence of the insurer's assessors over the applicant's practitioners.

The claim for medical benefits was also dismissed as the applicant admitted she did not receive the recommended chiropractic treatments, and further massage therapy was deemed not reasonable or necessary.

The applicant was involved in two motor vehicle accidents in 2002 and sought statutory accident benefits, including income replacement, medical, and housekeeping benefits.

The insurer denied the claims, arguing a lack of causation for symptoms that arose six months after the second accident.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant was substantially unable to perform his pre-accident employment duties after March 2003, he failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that either accident caused the delayed onset of his significant symptoms.

Consequently, the claims for income replacement benefits and further chiropractic treatment for the second accident were dismissed.

The arbitrator did award outstanding chiropractic expenses for the first accident and a small balance for housekeeping services, along with interest on the overdue amounts.

The applicant sought income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming he was substantially unable to perform his pre-accident job as a retail investigator.

The insurer terminated benefits and sought repayment of an overpayment.

The arbitrator dismissed the applicant's claim, finding he lacked credibility and had misrepresented his pre-accident medical condition, the nature of his injuries, and the reasons for leaving his employment.

The arbitrator concluded the applicant left his job due to poor performance rather than accident-related injuries.

The applicant was ordered to repay $1,140.30 in overpaid benefits.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for psychological treatment, physiotherapy, housekeeping, and the cost of assessments following a motor vehicle accident.

The arbitrator dismissed all claims, finding that the applicant suffered from significant credibility issues, having failed to disclose a prior accident and pre-existing conditions to medical assessors.

The arbitrator relied on the findings of the insurer's examiners and the Med/Rehab DAC assessors, who concluded that further treatment was not reasonable or necessary.

The claims for housekeeping and assessment costs were also dismissed for lack of evidence and medical referral.

Due to the applicant's lack of success and her representative's problematic conduct during the hearing, the parties were ordered to bear their own arbitration expenses.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits until the insurer terminated them based on an orthopaedic assessment.

The applicant sought benefits for the period until he returned to full-time work, arguing that a combination of physical pain, sleep apnea, and psychological distress rendered him substantially unable to perform his sedentary job.

The arbitrator found the applicant credible and held that the accident materially contributed to his deteriorating physical and mental condition.

The arbitrator concluded the applicant was substantially disabled from performing the essential duties of his employment during the disputed period and ordered the insurer to pay the benefits with interest.