The claimant disputed the insurer’s decision to keep her in the MIG, as well as her entitlement to various medical benefits. The insurer argued that the claimant had failed to comply with its section 33 requests for medical records, and as such, was not liable to pay any benefit. Adjudicator Grant agreed, noting that the claimant had not directed him to any evidence that she had complied with any of the insurer’s section 33 requests, or provided proof that she had requested the medical records, nor had she provided a reason for her failure to comply with the time limits. He further agreed with the insurer that the records requests were directly relevant and necessary to assist both the insurer and the Tribunal in the determination of whether the claimant was entitled to the benefits sought. As such, Adjudicator Grant concluded that the insurer was not liable to pay any of the benefits in dispute. He went on to find that, in any event, the claimant’s injuries fell within the MIG. The claimant relied solely on a section 25 psychological report, but had not submitted any contemporaneous medical evidence to support the need for continuing treatment, whether from a family doctor or objective medical professional.
