Tanya Walia

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

The respondent insurer denied a treatment plan for chiropractic services on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, arguing that chronic pain and functional impairment warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence of chronic pain or functional impairment.

As the applicant remained subject to the MIG and the $3,500 funding limit had been exhausted, the claim for the chiropractic treatment plan and interest was dismissed.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

He notified the insurer of the accident the next day but denied injuries, and did not submit an intention to claim benefits until over six months later.

The insurer denied the claim based on late notice.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to comply with the seven-day notice requirement under section 32(1) of the Schedule and failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay.

Consequently, the application was dismissed as statute-barred under section 55(1)1.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to non-earner benefits and funding for psychological and chiropractic treatment plans outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and that he failed to establish a pre-existing condition or psychological impairment warranting removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for non-earner benefits, finding insufficient medical evidence to demonstrate a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

As the MIG limit was exhausted, the disputed treatment plans and claim for interest were denied.

The applicant sought various statutory accident benefits following a 2019 motor vehicle accident, including non-earner benefits, attendant care benefits, and several treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed all claims.

The adjudicator found the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life, relying on s. 44 assessments and the applicant's self-reports of resuming most pre-accident activities.

Claims for attendant care and treatment plans were denied for lack of evidence establishing they were reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal also dismissed claims for an award and interest.