The husband and wife claimants were involved in a motorcycle accident and required amputation of their right legs. Both claimants were entitled to catastrophic impairment level benefits. Because the cost of both the claimant’s and insurer’s plan outpaced the cost of building a new home, neither plan was carried out. Instead, a new home was constructed. However, the amount the insurer was required to pay was limited to the value of renovations to the existing house. The claimants and insurer initially disagreed on approximately $70,000 in costs. During the hearing the insurer made certain concessions that led to the difference between the parties to be $17,000. Adjudicator Mazerolle preferred the renovation plan proposed by the claimant’s expert over that of the insurer’s expert. He accepted that the claimant’s layout that allowed for better access to amenities and was preferred by the claimants was reasonable, as it allowed the claimants to seek to maintain their pre-accident lifestyle. Adjudicator Mazerolle rejected the insurer’s argument that there were no amounts overdue under section 38 because neither housing renovation would ever be completed. Adjudicator Mazerolle granted a 25 percent special award related to the denial of a back-up generator. The adjudicator accepted that the claimants were at risk of being stuck in parts of their home if the power went out (which happened occasionally in the area).
