jurisdictional issue under you noticed under six c and it's whether the claimant gave notice of his injury to the employer was construction within the forty five day limit the governing rule is that a reasonable person rule when it's the date the date that the injury manifest itself is the date on which both the fact of the injury and it dr told him that he had carpal tunnel syndrome and that it was due to his work how does dr hassan fit into this scenario dr sanders the doctor who performed the he all right well he made the diagnosis or carpal tunnel syndrome he made a statement which accounts for di has seized upon that that was  not really to tell us the claim that it's not work related right well you don't know that he tells the claimant that he writes in his report that history this is where we only place we know that this occurred i believe that that comment is actually ambiguous he says said anything in september he never reported to the doctors he didn't go see the doctor he had no more medical treatment through the entire summer before september and september the same doctor said exactly the same thing that that doctor said in february there's been no change nothing has occurred that i know that i know that was about progressive and it gets harder to work with this man continue to work for all intents january two thousand and seven and for three other employers as an oil r operator until the week before the hearing in september two thousand and seven i understand you're about to put in the context of what the issue is in this case in a minute this weight issue that you know we evidence as to when that very clear rule of when the manifestation date occurred with the claimant himself his own statement about what happened  dereck and you know the claim that there didn't cheat she lived with her rep repetitive trauma for three years the court ruled that when she sought medical treatment was when it became the or carpal tunnel they say about his work because i do the same thing every day so what changed all of a sudden is you have to go for medical treatment because it was hurting my hands were tingling he's talking about going in two thousand  she says he's a robot to the doctor betts what he told me it was from all the doctors the one that told you that yeah i went to the vatican they did a test that's what he said i was trying to figure out what was wrong with it and he didn't she says ok so he said it was from your job yeah he said it was due to work he asked me what i do and i told him and he said it and then they could claim it goes on to say it sounded reasonably correct to me but but anybody clear in this state is reason that occurred in february then again page two thirty six when i went to the doctor that's what he told me it was early doctors and when they told ok here is the test yeah i went to the doctor they did a test that's what he said you know i don't know i was trying to figure out what was wrong but  possible that way i cannot believe that from reading the context if you could if you can your book true if you look at these pages around two thirty three to thirty six he's clearly making a case for two points where according to the evidence at both points in february or early in the year and again in september he was told by the very state doctor the very same information  don't have to blindly and then say this is just discovery but he kept discovering the same thing and they didn't stop work it worked for another year he didn't go to the doctor through the summer for anything other than a unrelated blood work up said last time about his carpal tunnel i'm a twenty four word i mean in the real day world right now to suddenly out of the blue is a letter produced certifying the same thing that the doctor told it with didn't he testify that he thought he was asked to produce the letter but he did the employer of the insurance carrier yes he didn't indicate that's after he went in verbal he told his boss i've got a problem  puts not clear when that happened because he didn't tell his boss until early october and the letter is dated september twenty fifth he went as he says i'm honestly don't know i'm not sure who that i that i was so he didn't say when to inquire whether it was work related back questions put to him he says i don't know he finally is pretty sure that that it was this woman the risk person who told him to go and there's nothing engi records that explains why he wrote the letter no it just shows it just shows up you know aside from the manifest where the evidence issue from the employer standpoint do you really want to point punish the employee for taking one for the team and sort of trying to work through the that you know notice is preserved lack of notice is presumed to be prejudicial to the employer or it could be that if the person has an injury and doesn't report it and continues to work scrapped with a much bigger bill later on because the employee did exactly that you know manned up and took one for the team took one for the team but this guy i don't take him for the team he took it for another fact this board displaced employers are going to have to deal with this person prospective situation of having a man who operates heavy duty equipment that vibrates they cause all kinds of  resonance while you operate it as testified to by my client that now we're going to say in february that's when the accident happened when you look at dr  page it says history says complaints of stomach pain numbness in fingers operating engineer the doctor does not delineate in his chart note anything other than the date and the results of some blood work up any commentary about off the fact that he has or has not that carpal tunnel syndrome has just as often pointed out dr who the e m g says this is not a result of any overt trauma or work related injury the symptoms are worse when he's lying down and standing the next visit back to the doctor just norvig is back in march in march he goes in and rocks about his blood test and for the first time capacity of a heavy equipment operator in gene anywhere in the rules ex he was in the classroom attempting to get certified for a city for his ability to operate a crane in the city number two he took his march and he continued to work until you encountered the safety manager mr walker who will fortunately as you read his testimony is relatively vague in total as to what he remembered what he didn't remember seven there's no question there's no doubt that this is related to the employment activity of this gentleman and what's interesting in this case it struck me as interesting play fast and loose with the facts that's my honest opinion i stand by it it's in that brief and i can give you i have a list of sample examples here  he said he'd been off work for months before he went to see the doctor in february the payroll shows that he was paid through february first so it says he sent reports to the doctor all through the summer about how it was getting worse but there's nothing no evidence i'm sorry i don't mean to be offensive personally to counsel but i do not understand where a whole bunch of these facts come from and i have others and evidence is there in this record that shows things are getting worse and i understand what he's saying about well february if we turn right around after he saw a doctor to say and filed a notice here that would have been done perhaps  was march eighth when he went back and that is the time that he was that he was told by but he says early in the year i learned from dr giovanna bit that it was a work related due to my work and it