Mr. Bruce Cook

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's denial of several treatment plans for physiotherapy, psychological services, and an attendant care assessment, as well as a claim for a special award.

The Tribunal found the applicant was not entitled to the physiotherapy plan or the attendant care assessment due to a lack of objective medical evidence demonstrating functional limitations.

However, the Tribunal granted the outstanding balances for four psychological treatment plans, preferring the treating psychologist's recommendation for 1.5-hour sessions over the insurer's 1-hour approvals.

A subsequent psychological treatment plan was denied based on a psychiatric assessment attributing current symptoms to non-accident-related factors.

The claim for a special award was dismissed as the insurer's conduct was not unreasonable.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a non-earner benefit, a physiotherapy treatment plan, a psychological services treatment plan, and a special award.

The Tribunal dismissed the claim for the non-earner benefit, finding insufficient evidence to make a meaningful comparison of the applicant's pre- and post-accident activities.

The Tribunal approved the physiotherapy treatment plan, finding the goals reasonable and supported by evidence of progress.

The claim for the psychological services treatment plan was dismissed because the applicant failed to prove the provider qualified for the higher hourly rate sought.

The request for a special award was also dismissed as there was no evidence of unreasonable conduct by the insurer.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought payment for a psychological counselling treatment plan under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The respondent partially approved the plan based on an insurer's examination, leading to a dispute over the remaining $1,945.00 for additional sessions.

Despite noting credibility issues with the applicant's self-reporting, the Tribunal found the full treatment plan reasonable and necessary based on the treating psychologist's progress notes showing positive response to treatment.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the balance of the treatment plan along with interest on the overdue benefits.

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

The respondent denied the claims on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries, including neck and back strain, were predominantly minor.

The Tribunal also found that the applicant did not suffer a psychological impairment that would remove her from the MIG, preferring the respondent's psychological assessment over the applicant's due to the latter's failure to consider relevant clinical notes and the applicant's non-disclosure of alcohol use.

The application for medical and rehabilitation benefits and interest was dismissed.