Vicki-Jo Edgar

The applicant sought ongoing weekly income benefits, rehabilitation assessments, and payment for psychological treatments following a 1993 motor vehicle accident.

The insurer had terminated weekly benefits and sought repayment of psychological treatment costs paid pending dispute resolution.

The arbitrator found that while the accident materially contributed to the applicant's psychological and physical condition, she was not continuously prevented from engaging in any occupation for which she was reasonably suited after July 1997.

The arbitrator also found that while ongoing psychological support was reasonable, the frequency of three times a week was excessive and induced iatrogenic dependency.

The applicant was ordered to repay $21,752.50 to the insurer for overpaid psychological treatments.

Claims for home assessments and a special award were dismissed.

The applicant, an 18-year-old, was severely injured in a motor vehicle accident while driving a stolen vehicle.

He applied for statutory accident benefits from his parents' insurer, Simcoe & Erie, and the insurer of the stolen vehicle, Pilot.

The issue was which insurer was liable to pay the benefits, which depended on whether the applicant was "principally dependent for financial support" on his parents at the time of the accident.

The arbitrator reviewed the applicant's living arrangements and financial support in the years leading up to the accident.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had returned to live with his parents in the months prior to the accident because he had no independent means of support.

Consequently, the applicant was principally dependent on his parents, making Simcoe & Erie liable to pay the statutory accident benefits.