The parties agreed to have the issue of whether the Applicant’s claim was statute-barred as a result of the previous denial determined as a preliminary issue. McLeish Orlando applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) on behalf of our client seeking payment of these denied benefits.
This benefit was denied, and the insurer relied on its refusal letter from 2016 that terminated attendant care benefits to the previous lawyer to refuse payment of the benefits and claimed that the time to dispute the denial was now statute-barred. On taking over the file from a previous lawyer in 2019, McLeish Orlando was successful in January of 2020 in having the Applicant deemed catastrophically impaired (CAT).įollowing the CAT determination, our office submitted an Assessment of Attendant Care Needs (“Form-1) seeking post-104 week ACBs on behalf of the Applicant. The Applicant was initially afforded ACBs from March to November of 2016, however, his insurer later terminated these benefits on the basis that they were neither reasonable nor necessary. The Applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident in February of 2016 and applied for attendant care benefits (ACBs). Aviva Insurance Company of Canada, where Salvatore Shaw and articling student, Ryan Marinacci, were successful at the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) in defeating the insurance company’s claim that our client’s right to claim accident benefits was statute-barred. McLeish Orlando celebrates its achievement in the recent decision Haines v. Written By: Salvatore Shaw and Emma Pedota, Summer Student
0 kommentar(er)
