Tag Archives: WTF

Judge-workcover

NSW WCC no power to order the workcover insurer to make payments – WTF?

We have lately been reading heaps of legal cases and recently came across a pretty disturbing one: The NSW Workers Compensation Commission (NSW WCC) ruled in a Jan 2015 case that it does NOT have the power to order a workcover insurer to(re) pay weekly payments to a seriously injured worker for a 2-year period even though the injured worker had a “no work capacity” status. WTF!?

Continue Reading…

website-hacked

Holy Schmoly- our site was hacked

As you may have gathered, our site was hacked last month and malware was found. The trouble started shortly after we received an email from a -clearly- very disgruntled IME, referring to his multiple negative reviews on our site’s “rate an IME / IME List“, and stating that we caused upset in those injured workers who were due for an IME assessment with this man. He demanded an apology and requested we delete the reviews pronto…or else… Coincidence? Maybe…

Continue Reading…

Paul-John-Gregory-lawyer kidding-me-workcover

Let’s have a look at what’s wrong with workcover

Workcover and its agents, and particularly those who work for them ought to be deeply ashamed of themselves. Not only do they mess with the lives of injured workers, but they are also experts in wasting a huge amount of money….Perhaps what really needs to be fixed in the first place is nothing but the workcover claims handling practices!

Continue Reading…

CGU-logo2

CGU workcover insurer films wrong injured worker to discredit comp claim

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.

Continue Reading…

nasty-judge wtf-certified

Injured worker not entitled to massage and chiro as will foster “sick mentality”

The following Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) legal case found that an injured worker was not eligible for paid massage and chiropractic treatment because such treatment is transient and may work against the injured worker’s recovery from stress by fostering a ‘sick mentality’. WTF!

Continue Reading…

comcare-crackdown treated-like-criminal-by-wworkcover stress-claims-workcover5

Workcover stress claims are getting tougher

Workcover stress claims can be extremely challenging to file and to litigate against. And they are getting tougher and tougher. There are many legal requirements that need to be satisfied in order to have a viable case. In order to submit a WorkCover claim for stress, it’s necessary for your legal team to demonstrate that you have suffered an ‘injury’ – at work – and within the meaning of the WorkCover legislation. This means you cannot typically claim for experiencing stress as an emotion, but rather, you are suffering from a clinical medical condition.

Continue Reading…