Disability Insurance Lawyer Blog

Social media and disability insurance - a word to the wise

It's just a matter of time before a policyholder's Tweets or Facebook posts become part of an insurance company's evidence against them. We advise our clients to keep their personal lives private and limit the information that they share online. Every disability claim is subject to traditional investigation, from field representatives who show up unannounced at your home, interview your neighbors or conduct video surveillance.

If you participate on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, or any of social media websites, be prepared to have this information viewed by more than just friends and family. If you post on forums and any of those postings can be linked back to you, those too are likely to be examined. An individual who is out on claim for a disability needs to be mindful of the public nature of the internet.

If you have questions about your disability insurance claim, call our office at 877-LTD-CLAIM (1-877-583-2524). Our practice is exclusively dedicated to representing policyholders in disability disputes. Call today to learn how we can help.

Taking Disability Issues to the CEO - Does it Help?

An article in this week's Wall Street Journal explores the strategy of consumers who try to solve healthcare problems by going straight to the top - calling the company's Chief Executive Officer. A consumer who couldn't get bills paid sent an email to the CEO, a group of reporters and even Michael Moore, filmmaker of "Roger & Me" and other documentaries that skewer (deservedly so) various businesses. The insurance company paid up.

Earlier this year, we reported on a Florida man who was being delayed by Standard Insurance. He contacted Good Morning America and the day after a segment on his situation was broadcast, his claim was approved.

Can this strategy work for everyone? If it did, we'd be the first to tell our clients to make the phone call. But you don't have to go it alone. If your disability claim is being denied, or you are being strung along with a series of delays, call our offices to learn how we can help.

Frankel & Newfield Win Appeal for Floor Trader: Vocational and Medical Data Critical to Protect Claimaint in a High-Stakes Appeal

Our client had worked as a successful Floor Broker with the New York Board of Trade for more than eighteen years when severe orthopedic conditions and chronic lower back pain made it impossible for him to continue working. He was unable able to stand for long periods of time without suffering excruciating pain, preventing him from working in the hectic and demanding environment of a trading floor. Upon leaving his job, he was approved for long-term disability benefits by both Guardian Life Insurance Company and Mass Mutual Life Insurance Company.

After approving his claims and paying benefits without interruption for three years, both Guardian and Mass Mutual suddenly claimed that his conditions were no longer severe enough to prevent him from performing the duties of his regular occupation.

In preparing our client's appeal, Frankel & Newfield worked closely with his treating physician, gathering objective and subjective medical evidence to demonstrate that our client's condition had not improved and that he continued to suffer from severe impairments due to his degenerative orthopedic conditions.

We also conducted extensive vocational research, outlining the extensive physical and cognitive demands of our client's occupation as a Floor Broker. Through our efforts, the information submitted on appeal successfully demonstrated our client's continued disability, as both Guardian and Mass Mutual overturned their adverse decisions and reinstated disability benefits to our client.

The success of our appeal rested in strong preparation of both medical and vocational research. The physically demanding tasks of a floor trader needed to be made very clear to both Mass Mutual and Guardian.

If you have an occupation that does not seem physically demanding, but is, outlining the specific tasks that must be performed and the limitations that are created by the disability is critical to a successful appeal.

Surveillance Not Enough to Terminate Benefits

A recent case has offered excellent guidance to claimants with orthopedic disability claims, and is well transferable to other impairments. A claimant was being paid for several years, when CIGNA conducted surveillance, revealing activities which exceeded the levels that the claimant had advised he had capacity for.

After securing the surveillance, depicting the claimant active on each day, and engaging in some level of activity, CIGNA terminated the claim, finding the activity level inconsistent with the claimed impairment. The Court determined that while the surveillance raised some questions about functionality, there was an abundant amount of evidence showing that he was impaired, and that the activity did not translate into the ability to work full time. One component of the claimant's evidence was a diary showing typical daily activity and pain. The Court found this evidence compelling, along with the support from treating physicians.

The claimant take away point is that a diary or symptom log could well provide an additional level of claim support, to rebut an insurer's efforts to rely upon surveillance. Linck v. Arrow Electronics (D. Mary. 2009).