Mr. M Lotfalizadeh

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing their psychological impairments and chronic pain warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence linking the applicant's psychological diagnoses to the accident, relying on a respondent's psychological assessment that noted symptom magnification.

The Tribunal also accepted the respondent's medical assessment finding no objective functional impairments related to chronic pain.

As the applicant remained subject to the exhausted MIG limits, the disputed treatment plans and claim for interest were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming a psychological impairment warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal weighed competing psychological assessments and preferred the respondent's expert, who found no accident-related psychological impairment under the DSM-5.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant failed to prove an injury warranting removal from the MIG.

Consequently, the claims for treatment plans beyond the MIG limit and interest were dismissed.