Lauren C. Kolarek

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 applicant claimed she suffered from psychological impairments and chronic pain warranting removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence of a psychological impairment or chronic pain, preferring the respondent's expert reports which indicated no significant impairments.

As the $3,500 MIG limit had been exhausted, the applicant was not entitled to the disputed treatment plans, interest, or an award for unreasonable delay.

The application was dismissed.

The insurer applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal for repayment of $23,569.91 in medical and rehabilitation benefits paid to the respondent, alleging wilful misrepresentation regarding his involvement in a motor vehicle accident.

A prior preliminary decision found the respondent was not involved in the accident as claimed.

The Tribunal held that the respondent committed material misrepresentation and that the insurer complied with the notice requirements under section 52 of the Schedule.

The Tribunal rejected the respondent's argument that he was not liable to repay benefits paid directly to third-party service providers, ordering full repayment plus interest.

The applicant insurer sought repayment of $30,015.79 in medical and rehabilitation benefits paid to the respondent, alleging material misrepresentation regarding her involvement in a motor vehicle accident.

In a prior preliminary decision, the Tribunal found the respondent was not involved in the accident as claimed.

The respondent argued she was not liable to repay benefits that were paid directly to third-party service providers.

The Tribunal rejected this argument, finding it illogical and contrary to the intent of section 52 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to repay the full amount of benefits paid, plus interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing her injuries fell outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to a pre-existing psychological condition and accident-related driving anxiety.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide compelling evidence that a pre-existing condition prevented her from achieving maximal medical recovery within the MIG limit.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's psychological assessment, which concluded the applicant's injuries were minor and not a barrier to recovery.

The application for additional medical benefits and interest was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the insurer's determination that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant claimed entitlement to a non-earner benefit, a psychological assessment, and removal from the MIG due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient medical evidence to warrant removal from the MIG, noting the absence of a chronic pain diagnosis and preferring the insurer's objective psychological assessments.

Furthermore, the applicant did not demonstrate a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as he continued to work and engage in pre-accident activities.

The application was dismissed.