Bassan Hagos

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that found she was not catastrophically impaired and denied her claims for attendant care benefits.

The applicant argued the Tribunal failed to properly engage with her expert's diagnosis of Somatic Symptom Disorder and improperly relied on surveillance evidence.

The Vice-Chair dismissed the request, finding the applicant was attempting to re-litigate the Tribunal's weighing of the evidence rather than identifying an error of law or fact under Rule 18.2.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including a determination of catastrophic impairment under Criterion 8 (mental and behavioural disorders).

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not sustain a catastrophic impairment, as she did not demonstrate marked impairments in three out of four domains of functioning.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's assessors, who found the applicant capable of living independently and managing daily activities.

The applicant's claims for attendant care benefits, housekeeping benefits, and various treatment plans were also dismissed, as she failed to prove they were reasonable and necessary or incurred in accordance with the Schedule.