Category Archives: Claims Management

Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

Identifying and Preventing Provider Fraud in Workers Comp Cases

Posted on by

Claimant fraud and premium fraud are two of the most well-known types of workers compensation fraud. In these cases, a worker may intentionally fake an injury (claimant fraud) or a business owner may misrepresent their employee headcount or incorrectly classify employees to obtain lower insurance premiums. Now, a lesser-known type is occurring with greater frequency: provider fraud.

Provider fraud occurs when a professional other than the injured worker or employer accepts a bribe or illegal kick-back in exchange for patient or client referrals. The circle of potential culprits includes lawyers, translators, doctors, chiropractors, nurses, and telehealth professionals. Opportunity, incentive and rationalization—the “fraud triangle”—are key factors that go into a person’s decision to commit insurance fraud. These factors have been exacerbated in recent years, due in large part to the pressures presented by the global pandemic and the growing reliance upon remote services.

Most schemes involve knowingly billing for medical goods and medical and legal services that are unnecessary or not provided at all. A chiropractor, for example, conducted illegal medical evaluations and billed these evaluations, claiming that he was approved as a medical legal evaluator. In another example, an attorney named his daughter as the owner of a translation services company, while in reality he maintained ownership of the business. Each time the attorney was hired, the translation business was also engaged and billed its services. Provider fraud is increasingly prevalent in California and Florida due to each state’s workers comp rules. For instance, in California, a provider can file their own lien with the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, even if the bill was denied. California is the only state that allows providers to file their own adjudication. At a higher rate than in other states, healthcare providers in California and Florida are sometimes found billing for services that were never rendered, billing for more expensive services than were actually provided, ordering unnecessary tests or procedures, and providing kickbacks to referring physicians.

So, how can we pin down provider fraud?

  • Review Provider Invoices and Reports: Risk professionals can spot potential fraud cases and fraud trends by closely reviewing provider invoices and reports and scrutinizing those invoices that are close to, but not at the top of, typical billing charges. In the workers compensation system, there are typically five levels of a doctor evaluation: Level 1 is the cheapest while Level 5 is the most expensive. Fraud often occurs in Level 4 billings since Level 5 would be too obvious. Providers who consistently bill at Level 4 could be a red flag for fraud.
  • Shine a Spotlight on Supplementary Services: Insurers sometimes overlook that provider fraud can occur with supplementary services such as translation and transportation companies, copy services, medical equipment suppliers and pharmacies. It is not uncommon for insurers to discover that these schemes may involve a criminal enterprise (possibly a referral network) orchestrated by individuals who are not medical or legal professionals. While claimants can be complicit, often they are unwittingly involved and potentially subject to treatment that is unnecessary or even harmful. 
  • Consider Emerging Tech to Pinpoint Provider Fraud: Artificial intelligence and machine learning are game-changers for fraud investigations. Through the analysis of historical claims data and insurance adjuster notes, some technologies can help professionals discover fraudulent claims faster. For instance, AI can be particularly effective at the entity level when a doctor or hospital that is identified as fraudulent can be added to a “bad actors” list for review in future claims. If you do not have a fraud feedback loop, start gathering information now. As risk and insurance professionals, we rely on business rules and claims adjusters to catch all the details of a claim and then form a cohesive narrative to investigate. While business rules work, the fraud feedback loop is necessary to effectively train machine learning models to detect patterns and flag anomalies.

Workers compensation insurance provider fraud has become a multi-billion-dollar industry that is bad for business. It is costly for insurance companies to identify and prosecute, it inflates costs for goods and services that honest business owners rely on, and it stokes consumer apathy and distrust in the insurance system. Risk and insurance professionals need to be aware of the warning signs so they can work diligently to detect and prevent it.

Understanding New York’s New Insurance Disclosure Requirements

Posted on by

If your organization operates or could be sued in New York, there has been recent activity on the legal and regulatory risk landscape that risk professionals should be prepared for.

New York’s newly-enacted Comprehensive Insurance Disclosure Requirements legislation opens the door for defendants to request that organizations disclose the details of their commercial insurance programs that may apply to a judgment in the case. These details include policy limits and potentially even access to your claims adjusters. For those with more complex risk financing structures, the law may also lead to the misinterpretation of the organization’s coverages.

For the greatest success in complying with this new regulation, risk professionals must become their legal department’s greatest ally, stepping in to lend their expertise to prevent potential confusion and errors. Risk professionals can be integral in keeping sensitive information confidential, monitoring all disclosure requests and alerting their teams to any discrepancies in the interpretation of the shared information.

Additionally, risk professionals should proactively identify the relevant policies for counsel, mindful that the policy or program must potentially respond to the plaintiff’s claim.

What are the New York Disclosure Law’s requirements and how do they impact your insurance program?

The New York law requires that an insured defendant disclose information about any insurance policies sold or delivered in New York that could be applicable to a plaintiff’s claim. This requires careful assessment to ensure compliance while avoiding potentially unnecessary insurance disclosures.

Depending on the claimed amount and a program’s retention levels, disclosures likely include primary insurance policies and may include excess and umbrella policies as well. 

The disclosure requirements extend to various risk financing structures, including captives, self-insurance programs, risk retention groups and surplus lines insurers. Many claims may not reach the retentions, arguably rendering the insurance policies nonresponsive to the claim.

Other than in personal injury protection cases, the New York law requires that insured defendants provide proof of insurance to other parties within 90 days after answering the complaint. This could lead to the disclosure of incorrect insurance information. To address that risk, risk professionals can instruct counsel to obtain the proper COI for a particular claim and advise that it may need to fine-tune their COI process with outside vendors or brokers.

In the cases where arguments are made that COIs are not sufficient proof of insurance, insureds should be prepared to disclose redacted portions of their declaration pages. 

The New York law also requires insured defendants to identify the claims adjustor assigned to the claim, including a potentially surprising level of detail such as the adjustor’s direct email address. It is critical to keep claims adjusters informed and risk professionals should alert their adjustors before this disclosure is made. Immediately report to counsel any plaintiff communications to the adjustor.

What steps can risk managers take to ensure compliance?

If possible, a risk professional or an attorney familiar with insurance coverage should assume responsibility for an organization’s compliance with these disclosure requirements in all New York cases. This will be instrumental in ensuring responses are uniform and avoiding disclosure errors. 

Creating a checklist, as well as a readily accessible library of COIs, redacted declarations pages, and other pertinent information can help keep the organization compliant with New York’s law. Although there might be differing disclosure requirements, organizations with larger footprints should consider extending this structure across other states as well.

By taking these steps, risk professionals can minimize insurance disclosure disputes, assist with their organization’s compliance efforts, and avoid unnecessary interference with an organization’s insurance program.

Recovery Tips in the Wake of Hurricane Ian and Hurricane Fiona

Posted on by

Across the Caribbean, Florida, and up the Eastern seaboard to Atlantic Canada, communities are facing devastation from a recent—and ongoing—spate of mid-season hurricanes.

Ian follows right on the heels of catastrophic damage from Hurricane Fiona. In the Caribbean, 20% of residents in Puerto Rico are still without power after Hurricane Fiona, and the island took another pummeling from Hurricane Ian while it was a Category 4 storm. To the north, post-tropical storm Fiona inflicted catastrophic damage across parts of eastern Canada last week, causing devastating property damage and leaving hundreds of thousands of Canadians without power. While it is too early for complete estimates, ratings agency DBRS Morningstar projected the insured losses may fall in the range of $300 million to $700 million. According to Patrick Douville, DBRS’s vice president of insurance, “Fiona will likely be one of the largest catastrophic events in history for Atlantic Canada.”

Once it is safe to do so, risk managers will have considerable work to do to help their organizations and communities recover.

Dalton advised, “Additional steps businesses should take include engaging a professional claims preparation firm to help document the claim, preparing a daily timeline of impact and changes to operational activities, asking for a cash advance, and setting up a cost tracking code and/or general ledger account to capture incident-related expenses. If it’s a contingent loss, meaning operations are down because of physical damage to a customer or supplier, ask that customer or supplier send you documentation of their physical damage and ask them to communicate with you as much as possible.”

In the July/August cover story from Risk Management Magazine, “Hurricane Claims: Key Tips to Minimize Losses and Maximize Recovery,”attorneys Andrea DeField and Alice Weeks offered guidance on steps for risk and insurance professionals to take before, during and after hurricanes, including hurricane preparation and response checklists.

For organizations impacted by this season’s storms, the following post-storm tips can help risk professionals navigate disaster recovery and the claims management process:

Post-Storm Checklist

  1. Gather insurance policies and related insurance records. If your policy was destroyed or is lost, contact your insurance company or agent/broker to request a copy.
  2. Contact other business partners who may have copies of your insurance policies and records, such as attorneys and accountants.
  3. Give written notice to your broker and insurer immediately. Notice should provide the following basic information:
    1. Name and address of insured
    1. Location of loss
    1. Date and time of loss
    1. Contact name, phone and fax number
    1. Brief description of the loss
  4. Acquire copies of police or fire reports from your local police or fire department, if applicable. If individuals caused damage to the premises or stole anything in the wake of the disaster, obtain a separate police report about the damage or losses or request that additional information be added to the initial report.
  5. Secure vital records and ledgers. Ensure that your accounting department opens a separate general ledger for hurricane-related expenses.
  6. Collect photos or videos as proof of damage. Ensure these are taken before any mitigations are implemented so that they accurately capture the aftermath and losses.
    buy zydena online www.mariettaderm.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/pdf/zydena.html no prescription pharmacy
  7. To the extent possible, take steps to mitigate any further damage once the storm has passed.
  8. If you have not already, retain a forensic accountant to begin preparing your business income and extra expense loss calculations.
  9. Prepare a proof of loss. A proof of loss provides details identifying the property destroyed or damaged, and documents the amount of loss incurred. Generally, any information substantiating the claim can become part of your proof of claim, including photos, videos, receipts and records. Check with your insurer for the specific information required as some companies may ask for a detailed list of documents or require you to fill out a specific proof of loss form.
  10. Submit proof of loss, photos, and reports to your insurer. Be sure to check any time limitations on the submission of a proof of loss and request an extension, if needed.
  11. Assist with the insurance company’s investigation. Property policies typically allow the insurer to conduct a reasonable investigation of the claim and require the insured’s cooperation. This may be in a provision titled “Duties in the Event of Loss” that allows the insurer to interview the policyholder claimants in a process called an “examination under oath.” The policy may also require the insured to exhibit the property, take reasonable steps to protect it, and generally cooperate with the insurer’s investigation. The insurer’s requests for information must typically be considered reasonable, however. A policyholder’s failure to reasonably cooperate could be used by the insurer as a defense to coverage.

Proactive Tips for Businesses Facing Hail Damage Claims

Posted on by

Last week, a severe thunderstorm unleashed massive hailstones in Alberta, Canada, damaging dozens of cars and unleashing potentially record-breaking hailstones the size of grapefruits. While the stones were notable, the storm was less of a rarity—indeed, hail is becoming increasingly common and increasingly costly as a natural catastrophe peril around the world. In 2020, Aon’s Global Catastrophe Recap identified hail damage in a severe thunderstorm as the driver of one of Canada’s costliest severe weather events on record. In 2021, insurers faced multiple billion-dollar loss events resulting from severe convective storms in the United States, with the greatest damage inflicted by hail that impacted the Plains, Midwest, Southeast and Northeast.

“Public perception often assumes that tornadoes drive the bulk of annual severe convective storm (SCS) damage costs,” said Steve Bowen, managing director and head of catastrophe insight on Aon’s Impact Forecasting team. “The reality is that large hail typically accounts for a majority of thunderstorm-related losses in North America during any given year.”

Further, North America is not alone in facing this peril, as hail also caused significant recent damage events in parts of Europe last year, struck Australia yesterday, and NOAA reports China, Russia, India and Northern Italy are all prone to damaging hailstorms.

As companies assess their natural disaster preparedness, there are some proactive measures that should be taken specifically for hail to leave organizations best positioned for any resulting insurance claims. Many commercial property policies contain provisions that any lawsuit against an insurer must be filed within one year following the “inception of loss,” otherwise it is barred. In other words, the “inception of loss” date starts the one-year clock ticking. The question then becomes, when exactly is that date? The Wisconsin Supreme Court hit this issue head-on in the case of Borgen v. Economy Preferred Ins. Co. In this 1993 opinion, the court determined that the phrase “inception of loss” in the context of hail damage essentially means “the date of the specific hail storm,” not “the date I discovered the hail damage.”

In 2018, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals took things a step further in Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. Lowen Valley View, L.L.C. In that case, a hotel filed a lawsuit against its insurer for refusing to cover hail-related roof damage under a commercial property insurance policy. The 5th Circuit agreed with the insurer’s argument that: 1) several hail storms had struck the vicinity of the hotel in the several years preceding the claim; 2) only one of those storms fell within the relevant coverage period; and 3) the record lacked reliable evidence permitting a jury to determine which of those storms, alone or in combination, damaged the hotel. The 5th Circuit further rejected the hotel’s engineering report, which asserted the subject storm was the “most likely” cause of the damage, deeming it insufficient.

Taken together, these decisions can blindside businesses that believe their insurance policies will automatically respond in the event of hail damage.

Let’s say you operate a business in Plano, Texas, and have a commercial property policy with a renewal date of January 1, 2022. You’ve noticed some recent leaks over the past week in your 8-year-old roof. Based on this discovery, you enlist a roofing contractor to investigate further. You learn that the roof needs to be replaced due to the existence of hail damage, so you submit a claim to your insurance carrier. Now, consider Plano has had at least 11 significant hail strikes since your roof was installed, according to StormerSite: 

Storm Date                 Min. Hail Size Range (Max)
11/10/2021                         1.00”
4/23/2021                          1.00” (up to 2.00”)
5/18/2019                          1.00”
3/24/2019                          1.25” (up to 1.75”)
6/6/2018                            1.00”
4/6/2018                            1.50” (up to 2.00”)
4/21/2017                          1.75”
4/11/2016                          1.50” (up to 2.50”)
3/23/2016                          1.25” (up to 2.00”)
4/27/2014                          1.25”
4/3/2014                            1.75”

Based on the Borgen case, the relevant “inception of loss” date would be the most recent hail storm on November 10, 2021, and each specific storm prior to that. This would mean any claims potentially implicating the events on May 18, 2019, and earlier could be time-barred, assuming your prior insurance policies contain the one-year filing limitation mentioned above. Given the number of equivalent hail strikes over the course of those eight years, you will likely have an uphill battle under Lowen Valley View in attributing the recent April 2021 and November 2021 storms to a loss under your current policy.

Even if it were somehow possible to assign each item of roof damage to a particular hailstorm—and further that statute of limitations issues would not limit recovery almost entirely—the number of storms creates another problem. With 11 storms occurring over the life of your roof, the insurer could argue that would mean 11 separate occurrences, which in turn would mean having to go through 11 separate deductibles before you ever saw a single dollar of insurance proceeds. Depending on the amount of your deductible, this means recovery could be impossible as a practical matter.

Read together, these rulings put the onus on business owners in areas at risk for hail damage to proactively conduct at least annual inspections to determine the existence of any roof damage potentially attributable to a particular insurance policy. It further puts the onus on business owners to understand the insurance claim process, including seeking tolling agreements to extend the deadline for filing a lawsuit.