Mr. Michael Drinkwater

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's determination that her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued that pre-existing degenerative disc disease and chronic pain warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant had a pre-existing condition, she failed to provide compelling medical evidence that it precluded her recovery within the MIG limits, relying instead on the respondent's insurer's examination reports which found only uncomplicated soft tissue injuries.

The Tribunal also dismissed the applicant's claim for an income replacement benefit, finding insufficient medical evidence to establish a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment.

The application was dismissed in its entirety.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including an income replacement benefit (IRB) and removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal first determined that the applicant was not barred from proceeding despite failing to attend an insurer's examination, as the examination was requested months after the application was filed.

On the merits, the Tribunal found the applicant was not entitled to an IRB because she failed to prove a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a customer service representative, having focused her evidence on her post-accident goal of becoming a hairdresser.

The Tribunal also held that the applicant's injuries remained within the MIG, rejecting her claims of chronic pain and psychological impairment due to insufficient medical evidence and methodological flaws in her expert's psychological assessment.

Finally, the Tribunal found the insurer's denial notices were compliant with the Schedule, dismissing the application in its entirety.

Following a reconsideration order, the Licence Appeal Tribunal redetermined the applicant's entitlement to an income replacement benefit (IRB).

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a customer service representative due to chronic pain in her left arm and shoulder.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant and her medical expert over the insurer's experts, noting that the applicant's ongoing pain and functional limitations were consistent with an inability to perform her work tasks.

The applicant was awarded IRBs of $341.96 per week for the disputed period, plus interest.

The applicant, a 65-year-old pedestrian, was struck by a motor vehicle and claimed statutory accident benefits for caregiver, housekeeping, and medical/rehabilitation expenses.

The insurer denied the benefits based on in-home and DAC assessments.

The arbitrator preferred the evidence of the applicant and her expert physiatrist over the insurer's assessors, finding that the applicant was the primary caregiver for her grandchildren and suffered a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident tasks.

The arbitrator awarded the claimed caregiver and housekeeping benefits, as well as the costs of ongoing chiropractic, massage, and physiotherapy treatments, medication, a medical report, and interest on overdue payments.