Dr. T. Chen

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the insurer's determination that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on psychological injuries and chronic pain.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries had resolved, noting his return to strenuous physical activity like boxing.

The Tribunal also rejected the psychological and chronic pain claims, giving little to no weight to the applicant's expert reports due to methodological flaws and inconsistencies with the clinical records.

As the applicant failed to prove his injuries warranted removal from the MIG and the $3,500 limit was exhausted, the application for disputed treatment plans and interest was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and sought accident benefits.

The respondent insurer determined the injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied funding for several treatment plans.

The applicant argued that pre-existing back pain and chronic pain removed her from the MIG.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence that the pre-existing condition would preclude recovery within the MIG, noting the injuries were predominantly soft-tissue strains.

As the applicant had already exhausted the $3,500 MIG funding limit, the disputed treatment plans were denied.