Dr. H. Mrahar

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing for removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairment.

The Tribunal found the applicant's medical evidence insufficient, giving no weight to a telephone-only orthopaedic assessment and negligible weight to a psychological assessment that contradicted its own psychometric testing.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant's injuries remained within the MIG, dismissing the claims for disputed treatment plans, interest, and a special award.

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

The insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on pre-existing conditions, psychological impairment, and chronic pain.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence that the pre-existing conditions precluded recovery within the MIG.

The Tribunal preferred the insurer's psychological and musculoskeletal assessments, finding no diagnosable psychological disorder or chronic pain with functional impairment.

As the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and the MIG limits were exhausted, the application for additional medical benefits and interest was dismissed.

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

The adjudicator found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor, as he failed to establish a psychological impairment or chronic pain syndrome that would remove him from the Minor Injury Guideline.

Consequently, his medical and rehabilitation benefits were capped at $3,500, and his claims for further treatment were dismissed.

The adjudicator partially allowed the claim for an income replacement benefit, granting it for a limited period during which the applicant was substantially unable to perform the heavy physical tasks of his construction business.

The claim for HST on an income replacement report was denied, as the Schedule does not mandate HST payments beyond the statutory cap for such reports.

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 Tribunal found that the applicant suffered only soft-tissue physical injuries and failed to establish accident-related chronic pain or psychological impairments that would warrant removal from the MIG.

Relying on the insurer's expert reports, the Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor.

Consequently, the applicant's claims for treatment plans exceeding the $3,500 MIG limit and for interest were dismissed.

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

The respondent denied ongoing income replacement benefits (IRBs) and took the position that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant was not entitled to IRBs beyond August 3, 2016, as medical evidence did not establish a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of their pre-accident employment.

However, the Tribunal determined that the applicant suffered psychological injuries, including driver and passenger phobia and a depressive disorder, which removed them from the MIG.

Consequently, the disputed psychological assessment and the treatment plan for chiropractic, massage, and physiotherapy were deemed reasonable and necessary and were approved with interest.