Dr. Shariar Moshiri

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

The respondent insurer denied the claims on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG due to a pre-existing condition, chronic pain, and psychological injuries.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove that his pre-existing conditions prevented maximal recovery within the MIG limits, failed to establish a psychological injury warranting removal, and did not meet the criteria for chronic pain.

Consequently, the applicant's injuries were deemed minor, his entitlement to medical benefits was governed by the MIG, and the appeal was denied.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including costs for a psychological assessment, psychological treatment, and physiotherapy.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the insurer liable to pay for the psychological assessment because its denial notice failed to provide medical reasons as required by s. 38(8) of the Schedule.

However, the claims for psychological treatment and physiotherapy were dismissed, as the applicant failed to prove they were reasonable and necessary, with the Tribunal preferring the insurer's examination reports over the applicant's contradictory self-reporting.

The claim for a special award was also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, specifically claiming $677.93 for the outstanding cost of a psychological assessment plan.

The respondent had partially approved the plan but disputed the remaining cost.

The applicant argued the respondent was statute-barred from denying the claim due to late notice under s. 38(8) of the Schedule.

The Tribunal found the applicant incurred the cost after receiving the denial notice, meaning s. 38(11)2 did not apply.

On the merits, the Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's expert and found the applicant failed to prove the additional cost was reasonable and necessary.

The application was dismissed, along with claims for interest and a special award.