Neutral Citation: 1994 ONICDRG 17
File No. A-003133
ONTARIO INSURANCE COMMISSION
BETWEEN:
D. A. N.
Applicant
and
ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY
Insurer
DECISION
Issues:
The Applicant, D.A.N., was injured in a motor vehicle accident on July 22, 1990. He applied for and received statutory accident benefits from the Insurer, payable under section 13 of Ontario Regulation 6721. Weekly benefits were terminated by the Insurer on September 7, 1990. The Applicant claims he continued to suffer a substantial inability to perform his essential tasks beyond that date. At the beginning of the hearing, the Applicant abandoned his claim for weekly benefits beyond the 156 week anniversary of his accident. The Applicant seeks benefits from September 8, 1990 to July 22, 1993.
The Insurer claims that the Applicant's substantial inability ended on September 7, 1990. The Insurer also maintains that the Applicant's complaints beyond that date are consciously exaggerated, or, if real, are related to serious medical problems which existed prior to the accident.
The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation and the Applicant applied for arbitration under the Insurance Act.
The issues in this hearing are:
Is the Applicant entitled to weekly benefits under section 13 of the Schedule, for the period September 9, 1990 to July 22, 1993?
The Applicant also claims interest on any outstanding amounts owing, and his expenses incurred in the hearing.
Result:
The Applicant is entitled to weekly benefits under section 13 of the Schedule, for the period September 9, 1990 to October 3, 1990.
Interest is payable on the amount owing by the Insurer under section 24 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. The Applicant is entitled to his expenses of the proceeding.
Hearing:
The hearing was held in North York, Ontario, on July 22 and August 26, 1993, before me, Janice Mackintosh, arbitrator.
Present at the Hearing:
Applicant:
D. A. N.
Applicant's Representative:
Thanh (David) Gian
Insurer's Representative:
R. W. Heather Barrister and Solicitor
Witnesses:
The Applicant, Dr. John Zeldin, and Dan Dao.
Exhibits:
Twelve exhibits were filed. A list of documents before the arbitrator is appended as Schedule 1.
Translation services in the Vietnamese language were provided by Mr. Son Nguyen of Global Translation Services.
Evidence and Findings:
Background:
The Applicant was unemployed for approximately one year before the motor vehicle accident of July 22, 1990.
The Applicant left his former job as a press machine operator in the summer of 1989, due to poor health. The Applicant testified that he was unable to keep up with his job on the night shift because he experienced difficulty sleeping and was always exhausted. The Applicant thought he would sleep better if he worked the day shift. The Applicant also expressed fear that if he continued to work on the night shift the condition of his heart and lungs would deteriorate.
What were the Applicant's essential tasks prior to the accident:
The Applicant, assisted by his representative and translation services in the Vietnamese language, prepared and delivered a summary of his pre-accident essential tasks to counsel for the Insurer, in advance of the hearing. This list, entitled "Pre-Accident Daily Activities", was marked as Exhibit 5 and includes the following activities:
PRE-ACCIDENT DAILY ACTIVITIES
7 a.m.
I got up, washing myself and took shower.
I dressed myself and was ready to prepare a light breakfast.
8:30 am. 10:00 am.
I was engaged in some cleaning around the house such as washing dishes, sweeping, vacuum.
10 a.m. - 12 p.m.
Usually I drove into the city or industrial area to look for work. Sometimes I went to shopping.
In summer time, sometimes I went to fishing and swimming or cut my lawn.
12 p.m. - 2 p.m.
I went home for lunch which I prepare for myself.
Usually I had a nap.
2 - 4 p.m.
I went out looking for work or to visit friends.
Sometimes I was doing my shopping in the afternoon.
4 - 6 p.m.
Returning home. Neating the house.
I prepare supper. After I finished, I dishwasher and dried the dishes myself.
6 - 10 p.m.
Reading newspapers, listening to music. Sometimes I took out garbage.
Sometimes, I took my girlfriend out, we dined out or went to movies.
I accept this list as representative of activities in which the Applicant would normally engage prior to the accident. During oral testimony, the Applicant mentioned other activities such as weight lifting, martial arts, dancing with his girlfriend, informal soccer games and travel. It became clear from the Applicant's testimony that these activities were something of an afterthought and were less central to his regular routine than the activities referred to in the list provided to the Insurer.
I previously considered the meaning of the phrase "essential tasks in which [an applicant] would normally engage" in the case of Chor Ting Lui and Wellington Insurance Company, Commission File No. A-001894, April 28, 1993. In that case, I concluded that not every activity performed by an applicant prior to a motor vehicle accident will meet the criteria set out in section 13. I interpreted the words "essential tasks" to refer to those activities connected to the ongoing business of living. I included the routine tasks performed by a person to maintain themselves, their dependants, and their home. I also included activities which reflected an element of commitment, a sense of purpose or responsibility to oneself, one's community or dependants.
In this case, I find the Applicant's essential tasks to include:
personal care including bathing, dressing, sleeping and eating,
domestic chores including meal preparation, general clean-up, washing dishes, sweeping, vacuuming, garbage removal,
general activities such as shopping, searching for work, driving, and washing the car,
routine physical fitness activities including walking, and swimming in summer.
Pre-accident medical condition:
Prior to the motor vehicle accident, the Applicant was receiving treatment from Dr. Bui for hepatitis, type B - Chronic (Exhibit 4). The fourth edition of the Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing and Allied Health, describes hepatitis as inflammation of the liver. Sufferers of type B hepatitis are described as being at risk for chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis of the liver, and primary liver cancer. Hepatitis B may be asymptomatic or it may produce symptoms of jaundice, joint pain, and a rash, with potential for internal bleeding. Chronic hepatitis is described as chronic inflammatory liver disease. In testimony, Dr. Zeldin stated that a chronic hepatitis condition could cause symptoms of fatigue.
I reviewed a photocopy of the clinical notes and records of Dr. Bui for the period June 11, 1987 to April 11, 1990 with one post-accident visit on October 2, 1990 (Exhibit 4). My review was hampered by the poor quality of the photocopy and my inability to decipher much of the handwriting. Dr. Bui was not called to testify. My review of the notes indicates that the Applicant's chief pre-accident medical complaints were of poor sleep, chronic fatigue, low energy, loss of appetite, and occasional muscle pain.
Dr. Bui's clinical notes and records contained reports of clear chest x-ray results, but no specific reference to the lung problems mentioned by the Applicant in his testimony. There was also no specific reference to heart problems, although there were references to indigestion and occasional palpitations which Dr. Bui concluded were anxiety based. The Applicant could not explain the basis for his concerns about his heart and lungs, nor the connection to working the night shift. I found nothing in the medical reports of Dr. Bui to substantiate the Applicant's fears concerning his heart and lungs.
I conclude that the Applicant decided to leave the night shift at his former employment due to poor sleep, chronic fatigue and an inexplicable fear that night shift work might harm his heart and lungs. I find that as a precautionary measure and, no doubt in light of the Applicant's chronic hepatitis, Dr. Bui recommended that the Applicant be permitted to work on the day shift to assist the Applicant to obtain the optimum amount of sleep (Exhibit 4, note dated 15.8.1989). The Applicant testified that when he left the night shift he made it clear to his employer that he would be capable of returning to work if an opening on the day shift became available.
For what period was the Applicant substantially unable to perform his essential tasks?
To be successful in his claim for weekly benefits under section 13 of the Schedule, the Applicant must establish :
that he sustained physical, psychological or mental injury,
as the result of a motor vehicle accident,
that the injury results in a substantial inability,
to perform the essential tasks in which the Applicant would normally engage,
during the entire period claimed.
The Applicant was involved in a multiple car collision while driving along the highway on July 22, 1990. The Applicant described the accident to Dr. Zeldin. He stated that the car in front of him struck a deer, his car struck the car in front, and the back of his car was struck by a van (Exhibit 6 at page 1).
The Applicant testified that he lost consciousness during the accident and woke up in a hospital somewhere near Whitby. The Applicant testified that it was still the morning of the accident when he regained consciousness and he was released from hospital that afternoon with a collar, some medication, and a note addressed to his family doctor. The Applicant could not recall the name of the hospital or details of his hospital stay. Neither the hospital records nor a police report was filed at the hearing.
The Applicant obtained a new family physician following the accident. On the recommendation of friends he went to see Dr. Reuel V. (Sonny) Talangbayan.
The Applicant first saw Dr. Talangbayan on July 23, 1990, the day following his release from hospital. He described the accident to Dr. Talangbayan, and reported his loss of consciousness. He complained of headaches, vomiting, and pain in his neck and back. The Applicant stated that he showed Dr. Talangbayan his painful, swollen, right leg and explained that he could hardly walk on it. The Applicant continued to see Dr. Talangbayan every three to four weeks over the next three years. The Applicant followed a program of physiotherapy for three months and continues to do stretching exercises at home.
I reviewed a photocopy of the clinical notes and records of Dr. Talangbayan for the period July 23, 1990 to June 14, 1993 (Exhibit 3). My review was hampered by the poor quality of the photocopy and my inability to decipher much of the handwriting. Dr. Talangbayan was not called to testify. Dr. Talangbayan also provided a medical report dated May 3, 1993 (Exhibit 1).
There is no reference to the Applicant's loss of consciousness during the accident, or to his swollen, disabled leg, in the materials prepared by Dr. Talangbayan. In his clinical note of July 23, 1990, Dr. Talangbayan specifically noted no nausea, or vomiting. I am disturbed by the apparent discrepancies between the Applicant's testimony and the materials prepared by Dr. Talangbayan soon after the accident. One of the accounts is unreliable. Dr. Talangbayan and the Insurer referred the Applicant to several specialists. None of these doctors made note of unconsciousness, vomiting, and a swollen disabled leg immediately following the accident. I conclude that the Applicant was exaggerating his initial injuries and symptoms in his testimony before me.
The Applicant testified that, for some time following the accident, his pain prevented him from doing anything, including cooking, cleaning, shopping and doing laundry. He testified that his roommate, Dan Dao, did these tasks for him. The Applicant provided very few details about the specific problems that prevented him from carrying out each of these activities. Nor did he state for what periods he was unable to do these various chores over the three years claimed.
The Applicant's roommate, Dan Dao, testified at the hearing. Mr. Dao confirmed that upon his arrival in Canada, he lived in the Applicant's home from March 1989 to May 1993. Mr. Dao stated that he made the decision to leave the Applicant's home in May 1993 because by then the Applicant felt well enough to do things for himself. Mr. Dao later conceded that the Applicant's girlfriend took over the household tasks, such as cooking and laundry, when she arrived in 1991. Mr. Dao also conceded that he left the Applicant in May 1993 because he wished to move in with his own girlfriend.
Mr. Dao seemed somewhat confused about the Applicant's activities around the house before the accident. For example, Mr. Dao recalled that the Applicant worked up to the date of the accident and stopped working after the accident. Mr. Dao was also quite vague about when the accident occurred and at what point in time the Applicant resumed various household tasks. Mr. Dao recalled that soon after the accident the Applicant could walk around, sweep the floor, and perform other light housekeeping chores. The Applicant could not vacuum the carpets in the house nor do any cooking. Mr. Dao testified that after a few months the Applicant was able to vacuum but could still not cook. Mr. Dao explained that the cooking pots were stored on the floor and the Applicant could not bend down to pick them up. Mr. Dao continued to cook for the Applicant until some time in 1991 when the Applicant's girlfriend took over that task.
The Applicant testified that he used to wash his new Toyota Camry car frequently, prior to the accident. Mr. Dao recalled washing the Applicant's car for him at least ten times following the accident. Mr. Dao testified that by the end of the summer in which the accident occurred, he no longer washed the Applicant's car, although he sometimes assisted the Applicant in doing this.
Counsel for the Insurer showed the Applicant a series of pictures taken on October 3, 1990, by a private investigator hired by the Insurer (Exhibit 11). The Applicant confirmed that the pictures showed him working on his car. The Applicant did not dispute the date upon which the pictures were taken. The pictures show the Applicant bending, crouching, reaching and twisting his body. The Applicant disputed the investigation report of McNulty & Associates Investigations Limited (Exhibit 10), which described him as cleaning and vigorously polishing the car. The Applicant claimed he was merely dusting and wiping the car.
In the report dated May 3, 1993 (Exhibit 1), Dr. Talangbayan diagnosed a cervical and lumbosacral strain. He described the Applicant as a very physically active person prior to the motor vehicle accident (Exhibit 1, page 2). Dr. Talangbayan listed several activities that the Applicant reported difficulty with, and concluded that the Applicant's injuries "interfered in his daily activities which he had been able to do without difficulties before the accident". Finally, Dr. Talangbayan referred to the diagnosis and prognosis of Dr. Roland C. Wong, who practices in the area of occupational health. Dr. Talangbayan's report provided few clinical observations concerning the specific nature of the Applicant's injuries and how these injuries limited the Applicant's movement and function. The report covers a three-year period of injury, but gives no description of the extent and development of the Applicant's injuries through that period.
Dr. Talangbayan referred the Applicant to Dr. Roland C. Wong. A copy of Dr. Wong's consultation note dated March 16, 1993 is included in the clinical notes and records of Dr. Talangbayan (Exhibit 3). Dr. Wong noted that the Applicant suffered a mild to moderate whiplash injury and prescribed exercises. The consultation note concluded with the words "not fit, heavy work". Dr. Wong also prepared a more complete report dated March 16, 1993 (Exhibit 2). In that report, Dr. Wong stated:
He [the Applicant] will have difficulty doing work that requires heavy lifting or pulling, as well as overhead work. He will also have difficulty doing work that requires frequent flexion of the lumbar spine, as well as prolonged sitting.
Dr. Wong provided no opinion concerning the Applicant's ability to perform his essential tasks as previously set out herein.
Dr. John Zeldin, an orthopaedic specialist retained by the Insurer, wrote several letters and two reports over the period August 29, 1990 to June 23, 1993. Approximately one month after the accident, Dr. Zeldin concluded that the Applicant had sustained a myofascial strain to muscles and ligaments of his neck, shoulders, and back at the time of the collision. Dr. Zeldin expressed concern that the physical examination of the Applicant elicited responses which seemed inappropriate and exaggerated. Dr. Zeldin concluded:
It is now just one month since the injury and the patient is still incapacitated. I would recommend the [sic] he continue on a regimen of analgesics, muscle relaxants and physiotherapy. It is too soon to project a definitive prognosis. The patient has had a soft tissue injury and my feeling is that from a physical standpoint the significant sequelae from this injury should settle down over the time frame of the next six weeks [October 11, 1990]. There seems however to be an emotional and psychogenic overlay here which makes it difficult to prognosticate. (Exhibit 6, page 4)
Dr. Zeldin described the Applicant's pre-accident physical condition quite differently than Dr. Talangbayan. Dr. Zeldin reported:
He [the Applicant] apparently stopped work in 1989 (about one year prior to his injury). He tells me he stopped at that time because he tired easily and he felt his "heart was bad". He feels that this prevented him from returning to night shift work. (Exhibit 8, page 2)
Dr. Zeldin's description of the Applicant is consistent with the records of Dr. Bui, the testimony of the Applicant himself, and the somewhat low key lifestyle described in the list of pre-accident daily activities provided by the Applicant in Exhibit 5. I accept Dr. Zeldin's assessment of the Applicant's pre-accident condition over that of Dr. Talangbayan.
Dr. Zeldin and Dr. Wong agreed that the Applicant suffered a mild to moderate whiplash injury. In oral testimony, Dr. Zeldin opined that from a physical standpoint the significant sequelae of the Applicant's injury should have resolved within two to four months of the accident [September 22, 1990 to November 22, 1990]. The Insurer terminated benefits on September 7, 1990. Dr. Zeldin noted no objective findings to suggest a physical basis for the Applicant's ongoing complaints three years post-accident, and could offer no physiological explanation for the protracted nature of the Applicant's physical complaints. No explanation was offered in any of the other medical information filed.
Dr. Wong noted spasm and trigger points in the Applicant's upper right back and reduced hand-grip strength on the right side, but he did not suggest that these findings would substantially interfere with the Applicant's ability to perform his essential tasks.
On September 26, 1990, Dr. Zeldin expressed the view that despite the Applicant's soft tissue injury, the Applicant could reasonably carry on his ordinary self-care and activities. This opinion is supported by the testimony of the Applicant's roommate, Dan Dao, and the surveillance evidence which showed the Applicant cleaning his car on October 3, 1990.
The Applicant testified that he was unable to cook for himself because he found standing and bending difficult. His roommate testified that following the accident, he cooked for the Applicant until 1991, because the Applicant had difficulty bending over to pick up the cooking pots which were stored on the floor. Yet Mr. Dao testified that the Applicant resumed the vacuuming several months after the accident. As early as October 3, 1990, the Applicant was able to crouch, bend, reach, and twist, while working on his car. I conclude that the Applicant exaggerated the extent of his difficulties performing his essential tasks in his testimony before me.
Dr. Talangbayan's report, dated May 3, 1993, provided no information or opinion concerning the time period of September to October 1990. However, Dr. Talangbayan did report that:
As far as household chores is concerned, he [the Applicant] has not been able to do much but some cooking, washing dishes, and occasional cleaning the house.
I conclude that from a physical standpoint the Applicant no longer suffered a substantial inability to perform his essential tasks after October 3, 1990. The Applicant is entitled to further weekly benefits from the Insurer for the period September 8, 1990 to October 3, 1990.
The Applicant conceded that recently he has noticed a big improvement in his arms, legs and neck. He stated that his chief physical complaint now relates to his back, particularly when bending. He also suffers from headaches, dizziness and vomiting. The Applicant admitted that he can now help his girlfriend with light housework. He feels ready to resume job hunting, but fears that he would be unable to work. He continued to drive following his accident, however he stated that sitting for long periods aggravates his back pain and results in headaches. He continued to walk for exercise following the accident, but he cannot walk as frequently or as far as he did before the accident. When the Applicant runs, it hurts him, so he has given up his occasional games of soccer. At one point in his testimony, the Applicant stated that he cannot lift anything over 5 kilograms. Later, the Applicant suggested the maximum weight he can lift is 10 kilograms. The Applicant stated that he has given up fishing, but he did not explain why. He has not attempted to swim since the accident because he fears that such activity will worsen his injuries (Exhibit 1 and part of Exhibit 3). He retains this fear despite the advice of Dr. Wong and his family doctor, to pursue vigorous exercise. He stated that his pain prevents him from dancing with his girlfriend, or attending parties.
As stated in the case of Lawrence Whitney and Co-operators General Insurance Company, Commission File No. A-001005, at page 14:
To qualify for benefits under this test, it is not sufficient to show that the Applicant has been prevented from returning to his full pre-accident level of activities, or that he suffers some remaining limitations. As stated in Lily Steele and Zurich Insurance Company, O.I.C. File No. A-001024, dated December 3, 1992, at page 32:
...it is not some inability to perform key tasks, but a sizable inability which is compensable.
As noted by Arbitrator Naylor, at page 23 of her decision Norman Downs and Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, Commission File No. A-000064:
Pain and suffering which is experienced as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident are not, per se, compensable under section 13, unless the experience of pain causes an insured to be substantially disabled, within the meaning of the section.
I have concluded that, although the Applicant continues to experience discomfort and a minor degree of disability, which may prevent him from carrying out a full range of activities, he has not established a substantial physical disability to the degree contemplated by section 13 of the Schedule beyond October 3, 1990.
Psychological injuries:
The Applicant testified that he was also troubled by emotional and psychological problems following the motor vehicle accident. There are repeated references in the clinical notes and records of Dr. Talangbayan to the Applicant's complaints of loss of appetite, poor sleep and chronic fatigue. In his report dated May 3, 1993, Dr. Talangbayan referred to the Applicant's complaints of interrupted sleep, and reduction of social interaction due to fatigue and disinterest. Dr. Talangbayan related these symptoms to the motor vehicle accident. It does not appear, from my review of the clinical notes or the report of May 3, 1993, that Dr. Talangbayan was aware of the Applicant's chronic hepatitis B, or his pre-accident difficulties with loss of appetite, poor sleep, and chronic fatigue. Such information might have assisted Dr. Talangbayan in assessing whether these symptoms arose as a result of the motor vehicle accident or were related to other conditions which existed prior to the accident. I am unable to accord much weight to Dr. Talangbayan's opinion concerning these symptoms, in the absence of testimony from him concerning the effect of the Applicant's pre-accident condition and the contribution it may have made to the Applicant's post-accident complaints of a similar nature.
In his report dated May 3, 1993, Dr. Talangbayan concluded that the Applicant suffered post-traumatic stress disorder with associated features of anxiety and depression. Dr. Talangbayan does not state the basis for his diagnosis. At various points in the report, Dr. Talangbayan mentioned complaints relayed to him by the Applicant such as interrupted sleep, memory loss, poor concentration, feelings of depression, anxiety, insecurity, and vulnerability. The report provided no clinical observations concerning the extent or frequency of these symptoms. No opinion was expressed whether these symptoms rendered the Applicant substantially unable to perform his essential tasks for any period of time. The only clinical observation concerning the Applicant's psychological and emotional condition contained in the report stated:
Physical examination on his most recent visit March 15, and April 13, 1993 revealed... Psychologically, he [the Applicant] remained depressed, sad affect. He was well oriented as to time, places and persons. There was no evidence of gross thought disorder. His judgement was not impaired, but he displayed a poor insight toward his difficulties. (Exhibit 1, page 3)
Dr. Talangbayan referred the Applicant to Dr. Low for a psychiatric consultation on February 16, 1992. Dr. Low prepared a consultation note of the same date which formed part of Dr. Talangbayan's clinical notes and records (Exhibit 3). Dr. Low noted the Applicant's complaints of reduced appetite, disturbed sleep, reduced energy, fear of heavy work, reduced activity and increased irritability. Many of these complaints are similar to the Applicant's pre-accident complaints to Dr. Bui.
Dr. Low noted that the Applicant quit his job in 1989 because of problems coping at work, but did not explore the Applicant's pre-accident psychological condition and inexplicable fear of damaging his heart and lungs by continuing to work the night shift. In the absence of a complete medical history, Dr. Low concluded that the Applicant suffered chronic pain syndrome. Dr. Low gave no opinion concerning the Applicant's ability to perform his essential tasks.
On the evidence before me, I conclude that the Applicant has failed to establish a substantial inability to perform his essential tasks as a result of psychological or mental injuries sustained in the accident.
Expenses:
The Applicant seeks an award of the expenses he has incurred in this arbitration. An award for expenses may be made under section 282(11) of the Insurance Act, which provides as follows:
The arbitrator may award to the insured person such expenses incurred in respect of an arbitration proceeding as may be prescribed in the regulations to the maximum set out in the regulation.
The prescribed expenses and amounts are set out in Schedule 1 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code and in Ontario Regulation 664, R.R.O. 1990, Dispute Resolution Expenses.
In the case of Ralph McCormick and Economical Mutual Insurance Company, Commission File No. A-000139, Arbitrator Naylor stated that the discretion to award expenses should be exercised in light of the objective of facilitating applicants' access to relatively inexpensive speedy and informal adjudication of disputes. Arbitrator Naylor concluded that expenses should be awarded unless it is determined that the application was manifestly frivolous or vexatious, or that the Applicant's conduct unreasonably prolonged the proceedings.
The Applicant principally relied upon the opinion of his family doctor in pursuing this claim. For the reasons stated above, I prefer the medical opinion of Dr. Zeldin. In addition, the Applicant was partially successful in his claim. I therefore conclude that the application was neither manifestly frivolous nor vexatious. I award the Applicant his expenses incurred in connection with the arbitration. In the event the parties cannot agree as to the total amount of expenses, I remain seized of this matter. Either party may apply for an assessment of the expenses before me.
Order:
The Applicant is entitled to weekly benefits under section 13 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule, for the period September 9, 1990 to October 3, 1990.
Interest is payable on the amount owing by the Insurer under section 24 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. The Applicant is entitled to his expenses of the proceeding.
February 22, 1994
Janice Mackintosh Arbitrator
Date
SCHEDULE A
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit 1.
Medical report of Dr. Reuel V. Talangbayan, dated May 3, 1993
Exhibit 2.
Medical report of Dr. Roland C. Wong, dated March 16, 1993
Exhibit 3.
Dr Talangbayan's clinical notes and records, from July 23, 1990 to present (16 pages)
Exhibit 4.
Dr. Bui's clinical notes and records, predating accident (27 pages)
Exhibit 5.
List of pre-accident daily activities prepared by Applicant
Exhibit 6.
Medical report of Dr. John Zeldin, dated August 29, 1990
Exhibit 7.
Follow up letter of Dr. John Zeldin, dated September 26, 1990
Exhibit 8.
Medical report of Dr. John Zeldin, dated May 28, 1993
Exhibit 9.
Letter from Dr. John Zeldin, dated June 23, 1993
Exhibit 10.
Report of McNulty & Associates Investigations Ltd. (10 page report)
Exhibit 11.
Package of Photographs taken by McNulty & Associates
Exhibit 12.
Two further photographs lettered J & I
Documents before the Arbitrator:
Report of Mediator, dated July 15, 1991
Application for Appointment of an Arbitrator, dated January 4, 1993
Response by Insurer, dated February 15, 1993
First Pre-hearing Letter, dated May 7, 1993
Second Pre-hearing Letter, dated June 4, 1993
Third Pre-hearing Letter, dated June 21, 1993
Fourth Pre-hearing Letter, dated July 15, 1993