The applicant sought income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming she was unable to work as a bottle packer due to physical pain and depression.
The insurer denied the benefits, relying on independent medical examinations by a physiatrist and a neuropsychologist who found no physical or cognitive limitations preventing her from working, and suggested she was feigning impairment.
The arbitrator preferred the evidence of the insurer's assessors over the applicant's subjective complaints and her family physician's support, concluding that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that she suffered a substantial inability to perform her employment duties.
The claim for income replacement benefits was dismissed.
