Jessica M. Bacopulos

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while riding his bicycle and sought statutory accident benefits for physiotherapy, massage therapy, and psychological treatment.

The insurer denied the treatment plans based on section 44 assessments indicating that the applicant had reached maximum medical recovery and that further treatment was not reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to demonstrate the treatments were reasonable and necessary, noting a lack of objective evidence for physical impairment and the applicant's own admission that two years of prior psychological treatment had no beneficial effect.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2017 motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's denial of an ongoing income replacement benefit (IRB), a chronic pain assessment, and psychological services.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the claim for ongoing IRB, finding the applicant failed to prove a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment, relying on a psychological reassessment indicating his driving anxiety had improved.

The Tribunal also denied the disputed psychological services due to a lack of evidence challenging the respondent's partial approval.

However, the Tribunal granted the $2,000 chronic pain assessment, finding it reasonable and necessary given the applicant's consistent pain reporting and objective evidence of meralgia paresthetica.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that denied her claims for an income replacement benefit and a treatment plan for physiotherapy.

The applicant argued that the Tribunal made errors of fact and law, including failing to consider certain medical evidence and misinterpreting employment records.

The adjudicator found that the applicant was attempting to re-litigate issues already decided and had not demonstrated any significant legal or evidentiary mistake.

The adjudicator also declined to admit new evidence that could have been produced at the original hearing.

The request for reconsideration was denied.

The applicant sought income replacement benefits and a physiotherapy treatment plan following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment within 104 weeks of the accident, nor a complete inability to engage in any employment thereafter.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's multidisciplinary insurer examination reports over the applicant's expert reports, noting that the applicant's experts relied heavily on uncorroborated self-reporting and failed to address her pre-accident job duties.

The claim for the physiotherapy treatment plan, an award under Regulation 664, and interest were also dismissed.

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

After failing to attend a pre-hearing discussion and two scheduled arbitration hearings, the insurer requested that the application be dismissed.

The arbitrator dismissed the application for arbitration due to the applicant's lack of participation and ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's expenses fixed at $1,500.

The applicant applied for arbitration seeking statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After her former counsel was removed from the record due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, the applicant failed to attend the pre-hearing and the rescheduled hearing despite being served with notice.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had abandoned her application and dismissed it for failure to establish entitlement to the claimed benefits.