Dr. L. Reznek

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits from the insurer, claiming he sustained a catastrophic impairment due to severe psychological and physical injuries.

The insurer denied the claims, arguing the applicant was malingering and not significantly disabled.

The arbitrator found the applicant credible and concluded he suffered a catastrophic impairment under s. 2(1.2)(g) of the Schedule, experiencing marked impairment in activities of daily living and concentration, persistence, and pace.

The arbitrator awarded income replacement benefits, attendant care benefits at $6,000 per month, and an occupational therapy treatment plan.

Housekeeping benefits were denied due to insufficient evidence of the pre-accident baseline.

A special award of $5,000 was ordered against the insurer for unreasonably delaying payment for the applicant's psychiatric medications.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits until the insurer terminated them at the 104-week mark.

The insurer argued the applicant was capable of returning to work, relying on assessments suggesting symptom magnification and a lack of organic basis for his pain.

The arbitrator found the applicant credible and accepted medical evidence that he suffered from chronic pain syndrome, depression, and adjustment disorder as a result of the accident.

The arbitrator concluded that the combination of the applicant's physical and psychological impairments rendered him completely unable to engage in any employment for which he was reasonably suited by education, training, or experience.

The applicant was awarded ongoing income replacement benefits.

The applicant, a pedestrian struck by a vehicle, sought statutory accident benefits including income replacement, dental, and housekeeping benefits.

The arbitrator found the applicant was not entitled to ongoing income replacement benefits, as she was not substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a companion.

The arbitrator awarded the cost of an alternative dental treatment plan, finding the accident materially contributed to the need for it, despite pre-existing dental neglect.

The claim for housekeeping benefits was dismissed, as the applicant failed to prove a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident housekeeping duties.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including a Loss of Earning Capacity (LECB) offer, medical expenses, transportation expenses, and attendant care/housekeeping benefits.

The insurer disputed the claims, arguing the applicant was not substantially disabled and that her psychological symptoms were the result of a pre-existing histrionic personality disorder rather than the accident.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of her employment due to a combination of physical and psychological factors, including fibromyalgia and depression.

Applying the thin skull rule, the arbitrator held that the accident materially contributed to her impairment, entitling her to an LECB offer.

The arbitrator also awarded transportation expenses and a modest amount of housekeeping benefits, but denied the claims for a cervical collar and orthotics.