Dr. Tonya Ballard

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a non-earner benefit, various treatment plans for physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and dental services, as well as an ambulance fee, interest, and an award for unreasonable delay.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application in its entirety.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to demonstrate a complete inability to carry on a normal life, relying on insurer examination reports indicating the applicant was independent in daily activities.

The Tribunal also found the applicant failed to prove the disputed treatment plans were reasonable and necessary, as the applicant did not provide the actual plans or compelling evidence to counter the respondent's medical assessments.

Claims for the ambulance fee, interest, and a special award were similarly dismissed.

The applicant sought a non-earner benefit (NEB) and funding for physiotherapy and psychological services following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life due to significant inconsistencies in his self-reports regarding employment and daily activities.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's physiatry assessment over the applicant's evidence, concluding the proposed treatment plans were not reasonable and necessary.

Claims for interest and an award were also dismissed.

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

The respondent denied several treatment and assessment plans on the basis that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and subject to the $3,500 limit under the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the medical evidence, including independent medical examinations, supported that the applicant sustained soft tissue injuries falling within the MIG.

The Tribunal rejected the applicant's claims that she suffered from chronic pain or a psychological impairment warranting removal from the MIG, noting her return to work and lack of functional impairment.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the disputed treatment plans were not reasonable and necessary.

Claims for interest and a special award were also dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for chiropractic services and a neurological assessment, which the insurer denied.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's pre-existing fibromyalgia was exacerbated by the accident, making the chiropractic treatment plan reasonable and necessary for pain management.

However, the Tribunal denied the neurological assessment, relying on an insurer's examination and the applicant's own treating neurologists who found no neurological structural disease.

The applicant was awarded the cost of the chiropractic services and interest.

The applicant was injured when his bicycle collided with a transit bus.

He applied for statutory accident benefits, and the respondent insurer approved benefits up to the $3,500 limit for predominantly minor injuries under the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant disputed the amount of his income replacement benefits and sought approval for additional treatment plans, arguing his injuries fell outside the MIG.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found insufficient evidence to vary the income replacement benefits.

The Tribunal also held that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence of a pre-existing condition that would prevent his recovery within the MIG limits.

The appeal was dismissed.