The recent announcement by the Victorian Ombudsman -Ms Deborah Glass– to investigate the management of Workcover claims is definitely very worthwhile initiative. For years, injured workers and their representatives have faced workcover Insurer representatives who just say “No”, no matter what!
Empowering injured workers | Exposing the workcover conspiracy
Recent ProjectsView more projects
It has recently come to our attention that a (fairly) new website/blog exists that is “providing information on [their] website to make it hard for biased medical examiners and psychiatrists to falsely deny your claims or shaft you”. We have taken the liberty to copy the list of IMEs and shrinks whose opinion are questioned (over and over again).
Generally speaking, and as for example outlined in the Independent Medical Examiner – IME – Sevices Standards, (in Victoria) a doctor hired to examine a patient/injured worker on behalf of a workcover insurance company ((or employer), does not establish a (standard) doctor-patient relationship. However, we believe that there are times when at the very least, a limited duty to the injured worker (patient) may well exist in some circumstances! And that the IME in question could potentially be sued for liability (i.e. malpractice)!
In August 2015 the NSW Court of Appeal decided that NSW injured workers could not make more than one lump-sum insurance claim. In other words that injured workers could not top up their lump-sum compensation payment if their condition deteriorated. However, yesterday (Monday 26 Oct 15), the state government will make a new regulation to override that court decision in that case, known as Cram Fluid Power v Green.