Dr. M. Mandel

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

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

The Tribunal allowed late-disclosed medical records into evidence, finding them highly relevant and of little prejudice to the respondent.

Based on evidence that the applicant received nerve block injections for ongoing back pain, the Tribunal concluded she suffered from a chronic pain condition and was not subject to the MIG.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's claims for specific chronic pain, psychological, and physiotherapy treatment plans, finding she failed to demonstrate they were reasonable and necessary.

Claims for an award and interest were also dismissed.

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

The respondent insurer denied funding for several treatment and assessment plans, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and its $3,500 funding limit.

The applicant claimed to suffer from psychological injuries and chronic pain syndrome, which would remove him from the MIG.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found no evidence of an accident-related psychological impairment or chronic pain condition, noting the applicant's minimal psychological symptoms, failure to pursue psychological treatment, and return to full-time work.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant sustained a minor injury, is subject to the MIG limit, and is therefore not entitled to the disputed treatment plans, assessment plans, or interest.

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

The insurer denied a treatment plan for a psychological assessment, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant's psychological symptoms were minor and did not warrant removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's psychological assessments over the applicant's, noting the applicant's symptoms were minor and partially attributed to postpartum issues.

The application was dismissed.

The Applicant sought medical benefits and the Respondent sought repayment of overpaid income replacement benefits (IRBs) following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found that the Applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG), as he failed to prove that his pre-existing conditions, alleged psychological injuries, or chronic pain warranted removal from the MIG.

Consequently, the claims for medical benefits beyond the $3,500 limit were denied.

The Tribunal also dismissed the Respondent's claim for a $6,400 IRB repayment, finding that the Respondent's notice of overpayment was equivocal and failed to comply with the strict 12-month notice requirement under section 52 of the Schedule.

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

The insurer denied several treatment and assessment plans, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant sustained psychological injuries that removed her from the MIG.

The Tribunal ordered the insurer to pay for the disputed psychological, physiotherapy, and chronic pain assessments and treatments, finding them reasonable and necessary.

The applicant's claim for an award under Regulation 664 was dismissed because the insurer reasonably relied on its assessors' reports.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a non-earner benefit and medical benefits for physiotherapy and psychological services.

The respondent denied the claims, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant was not entitled to a non-earner benefit as he failed to establish a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

However, the Tribunal determined the applicant's psychological impairments, including a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, exceeded the Minor Injury Guideline.

The Tribunal awarded funding for the disputed physiotherapy and psychological counselling services, but denied the request for a psychological assessment as duplicative.

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

The respondent insurer limited the applicant to the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) funding limit.

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered accident-related psychological injuries, including depression and anxiety, which removed him from the MIG.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay for a psychological assessment and a psychological treatment plan, plus interest on the incurred assessment, but denied the remaining disputed treatment plans as the applicant failed to prove they were reasonable and necessary.

The applicant was a pedestrian struck by a vehicle and sought statutory accident benefits.

The respondent insurer limited the applicant's medical and rehabilitation benefits to the $3,500 cap under the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, arguing that chronic pain and psychological impairment warranted removal from the MIG.

The adjudicator found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he suffered from chronic pain or a psychological impairment, preferring the objective findings of the insurer's examination assessors over the subjective reports of the applicant's experts.

As the injuries fell within the MIG and the maximum benefits had already been approved, the disputed treatment plans were denied.

The claims for an award and costs were also dismissed, as the insurer did not act unreasonably.