The claimant sought entitlement to various chiropractic treatment plans, a functional cognitive assessment, and interest on the payment of overdue benefits. Adjudicator Norris found the following: since the claimant incurred the disputed chiropractic treatment plans prior to their submission and without prior approval of the insurer or meeting any of the other exceptions under section 38(2), he was not entitled to payment for them; the claimant was not entitled to the disputed functional cognitive assessment as it was not reasonable and necessary because no further investigation into the claimant’s cognitive state was required (specifically, the claimant’s evidence failed to show signs of cognitive impairment significant enough to impair his independence with personal care and ability to complete activities of work and normal living, as suggested in the disputed treatment and assessment plan); and the claimant was thus not entitled to interest.
