Dr. Susan Mackenzie

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, specifically claiming entitlement to chiropractic services, psychological treatment, and a chronic pain assessment.

The respondent denied the benefits, relying on insurer's examinations and surveillance footage.

The Tribunal found that the chiropractic and psychological treatment plans were not reasonable and necessary, placing greater weight on the respondent's medical assessors who concluded the applicant had reached maximum medical improvement and that his self-reported psychological symptoms were unreliable in light of surveillance evidence.

However, the Tribunal approved the chronic pain assessment, noting that despite normal objective findings, the applicant's persistent pain and recommendations from treating specialists warranted further evaluation.

The applicant sought entitlement to statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including multiple treatment plans for physiotherapy, chiropractic, and psychological services, as well as attendant care benefits.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the disputed treatment plans and attendant care expenses were reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's independent examiners over the applicant's assessors and noted the applicant's failure to provide requested information to the insurer.

Claims for interest and an award under s. 10 of Reg. 664 were also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2016 motor vehicle accident that occurred while he was being transported in a correctional vehicle.

He claimed entitlement to two neuropsychological assessments and physiotherapy services, as well as an award for unreasonable delay.

The Tribunal found the applicant was entitled to partial payment of $2,200 for the initial neuropsychological assessment, as there was a reasonable possibility of cognitive impairment stemming from accident-related chronic pain.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the claims for the subsequent neuropsychological assessment and physiotherapy services due to insufficient evidence of reasonableness and necessity.

The claim for a special award was also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, specifically claiming entitlement to four treatment plans for chiropractic services and a chronic pain assessment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the chiropractic treatment plans were not reasonable or necessary, relying on insurer's examinations that showed normal ranges of motion and no functional impairment.

However, the Tribunal found the chronic pain assessment was reasonable and necessary because the applicant met at least three criteria for chronic pain syndrome under the AMA Guides, including emerging cannabis use disorder, fear-avoidance of physical activity, and development of psychological sequelae.

The applicant was awarded the cost of the chronic pain assessment with interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including psychological services, a driving evaluation, and physiotherapy.

The respondent denied the treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary.

The psychological services were not supported as the applicant did not recall previous sessions being helpful.

The driving evaluation was unnecessary as the applicant did not drive.

The physiotherapy was related to a significant pre-existing condition rather than the accident.

The application was dismissed.