Dr. Sandra Sagrati

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

The respondent denied several treatment plans, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant sustained accident-related psychological impairments, including Major Depressive Disorder and PTSD, warranting her removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's psychological assessor over the respondent's section 44 assessor.

Consequently, the treatment plans for psychological assessment and services, as well as hospital expenses, were deemed reasonable and necessary.

However, claims for physiotherapy, a chronic pain assessment, and an award for unreasonable delay were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming her physical and psychological injuries, as well as chronic pain, warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The respondent denied the claims, arguing the injuries were soft tissue in nature and resolved prior to a subsequent workplace accident.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove causation, as medical evidence indicated her motor vehicle accident injuries had resolved before the workplace incident.

The Tribunal also rejected the applicant's psychological and chronic pain claims, preferring the corroborating medical evidence that showed no such impairments prior to the workplace accident.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was not entitled to the disputed treatment plans, an award, or interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming his psychological impairments and soft tissue injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the injuries were predominantly minor.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove a psychological impairment, preferring the respondent's psychological assessment which indicated the applicant was 'faking bad' on validity testing.

The Tribunal also accepted the respondent's musculoskeletal assessment that the applicant sustained uncomplicated soft tissue injuries.

Consequently, the applicant remained within the MIG and was not entitled to the disputed treatment plans, interest, or an award for unreasonable delay.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the injuries fell within the MIG.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet her evidentiary burden to prove her injuries warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's medical evidence, which included in-person assessments, over the applicant's virtual assessments and uncorroborated claims.

The application was dismissed, and the disputed treatment plans, interest, and award were denied.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant suffered predominantly soft tissue injuries and failed to provide compelling medical evidence of chronic pain or psychological impairment warranting removal from the MIG.

The tribunal noted the applicant's self-reported psychological symptoms were contradicted by social media evidence showing him performing as a reggae singer.

The application for disputed treatment plans, an award for unreasonable delay, and interest was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for psychological and chiropractic treatment following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the benefits on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and the $3,500 limit had been exhausted.

The applicant argued the insurer failed to provide adequate medical reasons for the denial because it did not arrange an Insurer's Examination (IE).

The Tribunal held that the insurer provided sufficient medical reasons by pointing to the lack of corroborating medical evidence in the applicant's clinical records.

Finding the applicant's psychological evidence lacked credibility, the Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor and dismissed the application.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

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

The applicant argued that her pre-existing physical conditions and accident-related psychological injuries took her outside the MIG.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove her pre-existing condition prevented her from achieving maximal recovery within the MIG.

Furthermore, the Tribunal rejected the applicant's psychological evidence as inconsistent with her return to regular employment.

The application was dismissed.

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

The respondent denied the claims, arguing the injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant contended he suffered psychological impairments removing him from the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant's psychological issues were not proven to be accident-related, keeping him within the MIG's $3,500 limit.

The requested psychological assessment was deemed reasonable and necessary but only payable up to the MIG limit, while the psychological treatment and a claim for a special award were denied.