Michaelson Fleurantin

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, specifically a chronic pain assessment and a standing desk.

The insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's physical injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and that the standing desk expense was incurred before a treatment plan was submitted.

The Tribunal found the applicant had been removed from the MIG for psychological impairments, granting access to non-MIG funding for all reasonable and necessary treatments.

Based on medical records documenting ongoing pain, the Tribunal approved the chronic pain assessment.

However, the claim for the standing desk was dismissed under s. 38(2) of the Schedule because the expense was incurred before a treatment plan was submitted and did not meet the statutory exceptions.

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

The applicant claimed exceptions to the MIG based on pre-existing conditions, chronic pain, and psychological impairment.

The Tribunal found that the medical evidence, including reports from the respondent's section 44 assessors, supported that the injuries were predominantly minor soft tissue injuries.

The applicant failed to prove any pre-existing condition, chronic pain with functional impairment, or psychological impairment that would warrant removal from the MIG.

Consequently, the disputed treatment plans for psychological and chiropractic services were denied, and the application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including income replacement benefits and physiotherapy.

The applicant failed to attend the scheduled videoconference hearing despite receiving proper notice.

The adjudicator proceeded in the applicant's absence pursuant to section 7(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

As the applicant bore the burden of proof and provided no evidence or submissions, the application was dismissed and all claimed benefits were denied.