CGU workcover insurer secretly filmed a wrong injured worker for ‘surveillance’ purposes in a (fully sick and undoubtedly disguised) attempt to discredit the genuine injured worker’s workcover claim. Was it not for a most ethical Dr Timothy Wood this poor injured worker’s claim would have been jeopardised, more so as the covert surveillance was undertaken at the famous 130 week (weekly pay cut-off) mark.
While this article was submitted earlier today by “Bullied” under our “Seen Something Interesting?” page, we believe it ought to be plastered on our (and every like-minded site) front page.
According to CGU workers comp website:
Sustaining an injury at work can be a stressful time. CGU will work with you, your doctor and your employer to make your return to work as smooth and safe as possible.
We will support you through the process and help you understand your rights and obligations and any workers compensation benefits that you may be entitled to.
We’re here to help give you all the support you need to get back on your feet and ensure you can get on with your life.
CGU workcover insurer films wrong injured worker to discredit comp claim
Doctor claims CGU filmed wrong patient in a covert operation to discredit compensation claim
ANGUS THOMPSON | Herald Sun
April 21, 2015 8:00PM
An insurer’s [CGU] secret surveillance of an injured worker has been foiled by a doctor claiming they had filmed the wrong patient [/injured worker].
Amanda Bailey became aware she was the target of a covert operation after an expert report revealed she was caught up in a potential case of mistaken identity.
In his report to insurer CGU, workers compensation physician Timothy Wood said he was “concerned the photographs shown as being Ms Bailey are not in fact Ms Bailey”.
“They do not appear to be the same person I examined today and I would request clarification as to whether this was indeed Ms Bailey in the photographs,” Dr Wood said.
“Certainly, the level of function demonstrated by the person in the various photos is something I have been unable to demonstrate during the two examinations and do not believe that Ms Bailey is capable of.”
Ms Bailey suffers pain throughout her body as a result of injuring her thumb while working at Dandenong-Cranbourne RSL in 2010.
The report, part of her 130-week WorkCover review, said Ms Bailey was unable to return to work and described walking “as though she had glass under her foot”.
Ms Bailey’s lawyers are now demanding a copy of the surveillance report and other communication.
But CGU declined, in letters, to release the surveillance.
A spokesman said the company couldn’t discuss “details of individual claims, legal proceedings or personal information due to privacy provisions”.
Robinson Gill principal Jeremy King said Ms Bailey’s claim could’ve been “seriously jeopardised through CGU’s actions but for the vigilance of Dr Wood”.
Arguably, sometimes private investigators are given an address with no description of the claimant (the injured sod), and sometimes the address given to them may be wrong. On the other hand the investigator/s may have simply stuffed up. We don’t know the full facts of this case of mistaken identity and so we can’t comment on what went wrong.
However whilst one may believe this to be -purely- a case of ‘mistaken’ identify and perhaps from a less than professional private investigator (It just shows how good they are at their job, = LOUSY clowns), in our injured opinion this is yet another deliberate dirty tactic used by workcover insurers, such as CGU to mitigate ‘damages and loss’. Over the years we have heard a number of stories from bewildered and outraged injured workers who obtained their surveillance material (under FOI) showing that a ‘stranger’ was filmed. One one occasion it was the twin brother of an injured worker, and at a push we may forgive this case of ‘mistaken’ identity, but on several other occasions they really truly filmed and followed complete strangers. If that’s not enough, please tell us why in our modern digital world, many surveillance video’s and pictures appear ‘grainy’? But their cameras can zoom in to a pimple?