Peter White

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought payment for a chiropractic treatment plan under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The respondent partially approved the plan but denied the remaining $399.52.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove the disputed amount was reasonable and necessary, noting a lack of evidence showing significant improvement from prior chiropractic treatment and the applicant's own report to an orthopaedic surgeon that the treatment was unsuccessful.

The application was dismissed and no interest was awarded.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that denied her entitlement to three treatment plans for physiotherapy services and an award.

The applicant argued the adjudicator misapplied sections 49.1 and 64 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule regarding unlicensed service providers and document submission waivers.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the applicant failed to raise section 49.1 at the initial hearing and was attempting to re-litigate arguments regarding section 64, thereby failing to establish an error of law or fact under Rule 18.2(b).

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits.

The parties proceeded to a preliminary issues hearing regarding the applicant's entitlement to a Loss of Earning Capacity Benefit (LECB).

At the hearing, the parties agreed that the applicant was entitled to an offer of an LECB effective April 30, 2003.

The arbitrator recorded the parties' procedural agreements on outstanding issues, including scheduling a residual earning capacity assessment and producing income loss calculations, and adjourned the main hearing.