The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to treatment plans for psychological services and chiropractic treatment. Adjudicator Grant found that the claimant suffered from chronic pain, which removed him from the MIG. He was not entitled to the two treatment plans in dispute, which were found to be not reasonable and necessary as a result of the accident. The treatment plans in dispute were not supported by any medical evidence or recommendation from the treating physician. Subjective reports of some relief from previous physiotherapy did not establish that the in-dispute chiropractic treatment plan was reasonable and necessary. A psychological pre-screening report was not sufficient evidence to indicate the existence of a psychological impairment that was not sequelae of minor injuries.
