Sylvia M. Robin

The respondent insurer requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that removed the applicant from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain.

The respondent argued the Tribunal made significant errors of fact and law regarding the applicant's shoulder pain, participation in treatment, and functionality.

The Vice-Chair found that while the Tribunal did err in attributing the applicant's shoulder pain to the accident and in its analysis of his functionality, these errors would not have changed the ultimate decision.

The medical evidence, including reports from the respondent's own assessor, supported a finding of chronic pain in the applicant's neck and lower back that negatively affected his ability to work.

The request for reconsideration was dismissed.

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

The respondent denied the claims, arguing the injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered from chronic pain, removing him from the MIG.

However, the Tribunal denied the claim for physiotherapy, finding it was not reasonable and necessary as previous identical treatment had not helped.

The Tribunal granted the claim for a chronic pain assessment, finding it reasonable and necessary to investigate the condition further.