Tanya Purevich

The applicant, who sustained catastrophic impairments in a motorcycle accident, sought various statutory accident benefits denied by the respondent insurer.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant entitled to attendant care benefits of $6,000 per month, preferring the evidence of the applicant's occupational therapists who accounted for his fluctuating daily functionality over the respondent's assessor.

The Tribunal also awarded $87,809 for home modifications and capped the assessment cost at $2,200, finding most proposed modifications reasonable and necessary.

The claim for dietician services was granted due to the applicant's accident-related appetite loss and blood sugar management issues.

However, the Tribunal denied funding for service dog training, finding insufficient evidence that it was a reasonable and necessary medical benefit, and declined to order a special award as the insurer's denials were not unreasonable.

The Applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received attendant care and housekeeping benefits for 104 weeks.

The Insurer then issued a refusal to pay further benefits, citing the 104-week limit.

Over eight years later, the Applicant disputed the refusal, arguing that the limitation period did not apply because he was later deemed catastrophically impaired, which would entitle him to post-104 week benefits.

The Arbitrator held that the Insurer's refusal was clear and unequivocal, and the Applicant missed the two-year limitation period to dispute it.

The Applicant is therefore precluded from proceeding to arbitration regarding his entitlement to these benefits.