Lori Sprott

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

The respondent denied certain chiropractic treatment plans 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 for removal from the MIG due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of functional impairment from chronic pain or a psychological impairment caused by the accident.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the treatment plans were not payable and the application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought payment for five medical assessments under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The insurer denied the assessments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the psychological, orthopaedic, and physiatry assessments were not reasonable and necessary.

However, the Tribunal ordered the insurer to pay for the chronic pain assessment, finding it reasonable and necessary to explore treatment options, and the functional impairment assessment, as the insurer failed to provide a proper medical reason for denial within the required timeframe.

The applicant was awarded interest on overdue payments but denied a special award under section 10 of Regulation 664.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including income replacement, attendant care, and housekeeping benefits.

The insurer denied the claims.

The arbitrator dismissed all of the applicant's claims, finding that the applicant lacked credibility and failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment or his housekeeping tasks.

The arbitrator also found that the applicant's wife did not sustain an economic loss to justify the attendant care and housekeeping claims.

Claims for a special award and interest were consequently dismissed.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident but failed to participate in the arbitration process or communicate with his counsel, who subsequently withdrew.

The insurer brought a motion to dismiss the application as frivolous or vexatious under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The arbitrator declined to find the claim frivolous or vexatious but deemed the application withdrawn under Rule 70 due to the applicant's abandonment of the proceeding.

The applicant was ordered to pay the insurer's expenses of $1,712.63.