Ms. S. Simmons

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including an income replacement benefit and medical benefits for physiotherapy and chiropractic services.

The respondent denied the benefits on the basis that the applicant did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment and that the proposed treatments were not reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, preferring the evidence of the respondent's assessors that the applicant's psychological and physical impairments did not meet the substantial inability test, and finding that the applicant had already received adequate treatment for her accident-related injuries.

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

The respondent determined the applicant sustained a minor injury and was subject to the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit of $3,500, denying several treatment plans.

The applicant argued his psychological impairments and chronic pain removed him from the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant's psychological evidence inconsistent and preferred the respondent's psychological assessment, which concluded the impairments were minor.

The Tribunal also found the applicant did not meet the criteria for chronic pain under the AMA Guides and had achieved full functional recovery.

As the applicant sustained a minor injury and had exhausted the MIG funding limit, the disputed treatment plans and interest were denied.