2 total
Applicant removed from Minor Injury Guideline due to chronic pain; disputed treatment plans found reasonable and necessary.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.
The respondent insurer denied the claims, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and were subject to the $3,500 limit.
The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered from chronic pain and psychological impairments that caused functional disability, removing him from the MIG.
The Tribunal concluded that all disputed treatment plans, including chiropractic services, psychological services, and various assessments, were reasonable and necessary.
The applicant was awarded the claimed benefits and interest on overdue payments.
Arbitrator granted income replacement benefits to one applicant but dismissed the co-applicant's claims due to credibility issues.
The applicants, who were injured in a rear-end motor vehicle collision, sought arbitration after the insurer terminated their statutory accident benefits.
Mr. Narain claimed ongoing income replacement benefits, medical benefits, housekeeping expenses, and the cost of a medical assessment.
Ms. Mangroo claimed income replacement benefits, medical benefits, and housekeeping expenses.
The arbitrator found Mr. Narain credible regarding his ongoing back and knee pain, granting his claim for income replacement benefits and the cost of a physiatrist's report, but dismissed his claims for further medical treatment and housekeeping expenses.
Conversely, the arbitrator found Ms. Mangroo to be an unreliable witness due to numerous inconsistencies in her evidence and dismissed all of her claims, concluding she failed to prove a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident employment or housekeeping tasks.
No linked lawyers found.
No linked judges found.