Tag Archive for: california

YOU HAVE TO GET OUT OF B-E-D TO SETTLE

Maybe being in BED- Blame, Excuses, Denial- is really what’s blocking your ability to close claims.
Blame
It’s easy to blame the other side. “The adjuster/ defense attorney/ applicant’s counsel isn’t paying attention.”  “They’re keeping the case going for the wrong reasons.” Whatever. The only person you can control is you. Without casting aspersions, start communicating anew keeping the end in sight. This might mean sending an email AND a letter, calling and maybe texting. Bring in your favored mediator AND file a DOR.
Excuses
Let go of the past. Maybe you made a mistake or missed an opportunity which would have set the claim on a better course. How much could you have settled that claim for 4 years ago? Resolve to start over today.

Denial
Get serious about evaluation. You can’t properly manage a claim if you shut your eyes to the true cost of keeping it open. In “old dog” cases, medical expenses almost always go up. Even when a drug is scheduled to go generic, a new, better, expensive drug becomes available. A settlement has to cover the injured worker’s future claim-related medical expense. Six percent is not a realistic discount rate. On the other hand, let’s be honest about what treatments the injured worker will actually use.

Get Out of B-E-D Now
Changing your attitude can change your results.

Maybe you made a mistake or missed an opportunity which would have set the claim on a better course. How much could you have settled that claim for 4 years ago? Resolve to start over today.

Cannibal Negotiation

Cannibal negotiation refers to a deal where parties figure out how to get money from an entity not at the table.

The term originates from an arrangement where OldCo paid NewCo to keep NewCo’s cheaper, competing product off the market. NewCo is paid for not selling anything. The buyers who need that product have to pay OldCo’s high price. The buyers are being cannibalized.

Honest disagreement can thwart parties’ good intentions to reach a workers compensation settlement. Cannibal negotiations can ethically resolve disputes over the value of future medical benefits.

The first place a true cannibal negotiator should turn is Medi-Cal. Medi-Cal can fill the gap between parties’ valuations and provide a safety net to pay for the injured worker’s health care at no cost to any party. A special needs trust or structured settlement may be needed to keep an applicant eligible for traditional Medi-Cal. Under expanded Medi-Cal, the applicant can receive a settlement of any size without losing eligibility so long as Modified Adjusted Gross Income is under the limit. Caution: home health care and non-emergency medical transportation are not included in expanded Medi-Cal. 

Medicare is the next source a cannibal should think of for a funding entity not at the negotiating table. Medicare is different from Medi-Cal in that the injured worker had to contribute the required number of quarters to achieve eligibility. Also, a Medicare Set-Aside must be depleted before additional funds can be tapped to pay for a claim-related Medicare-eligible expense.

Lastly, the parties may be able to use part of the settlement to fund health insurance premiums for the injured worker. A health insurance agent can provide a quote for Affordable Care Act coverage regardless of the injured worker’s pre-existing condition. A (cannibalized) subsidy may indeed keep the premium cost affordable.

Cannibal negotiators can “prey” on more than one source. Some applicants are “Medi-Medi”, enrolled in both Medicare and Medi-Cal. MSAs should not be tapped until the applicant is eligible for Medicare; for the period up to 30 months before then, Affordable Care Act insurance can provide coverage.

Are You A Rule-Breaker?

Workers Compensation professionals have to know a lot: the California Labor Code, Title 8 regulations, state and federal rules governing health care entitlements. To make things even harder, the rules of this highly-governed road keep changing. Workers Compensation may be the most intricate, heavily regulated area of practice. These rules can constrain the parties’ ability to negotiate satisfactory settlements.

You only have to know one rule about mediation: everything that happens within the mediation, including pre-mediation and follow-up communication, is confidential.  You don’t have to share your mediation brief with the other side if you don’t want to. In mediation, in contrast to WCAB practice or arbitration, you can get creative. You can break the rules.

 Mediated agreements can include provisions a WCJ could never order, such as agreements relating to actions in other forums.  You can settle claims which haven’t been made yet.  Parties can use creative solutions like structured settlements and medical care trusts. The mediator can help you brainstorm.

As mediator, I help parties settle cases.  There are no rulings in mediation, so no one loses.  Go ahead, let’s break some rules– and settle the case.

Six Biggest Mediation Misconceptions

The Mediator might rule against me.

Mediators do not make any rulings. The role of the mediator is to help the parties resolve the issues.

If I go to mediation, I will have to give up something.
Negotiation is about compromise. Each side usually gives up something. You won’t give up anything unless you, and only you, make the choice to negotiate a deal.
 
Mediation is too expensive.
Mediation is cheaper than litigation. It is efficient and eliminates other procedures which use up time and money.
 
Mediation is a waste of time.
Mediation has been shown repeatedly to be effective in resolving all issues. But even if you don’t conclude your case at the mediation, mediation typically allows parties to learn more about their opponent’s case—and their own. Issues are narrowed, setting the stage for further negotiation or more efficient litigation.
 
There is no reason to mediate—our case is a sure winner.
Mediation might be a place to test that hypothesis—or convince the other side. Presumably you wouldn’t be in litigation if there weren’t two sides to the story. If there is counsel on both sides, your opponent is spending time, money and effort for a reason. Applicants representing themselves might just need a forum to tell their story. Litigation is always uncertain. Settlement is the only way to retain control over the outcome, rather than let a judge impose a resolution on you.

We look like push-overs by suggesting mediation.
Mediation is the rule rather than the exception in most areas of law in the United States. The fact is that most cases settle at some point. Smart claims professionals and lawyers use every tool at their disposal to conclude cases as early as possible.

Understanding Public Income and Medical Benefits after the Affordable Care Act

acaThere’s a lot more to the Affordable Care Act than buying private health insurance through an exchange marketplace like www.CoveredCA.com.

Four kinds of public benefits can help people get the medical care they need:

  1. Subsidized premiums and co-pays for private health insurance purchased through an exchange.  Commercial insurers issue these policies, not the government.
  2. Medicare, for people who have contributed the necessary number of quarters during their years of employment. Medicare Set-Asides are required when a Medicare beneficiary settles a claim for future medical care.
  3. Expanded Medi-Cal for people with low income; there is no asset limit, no requirement for a set-aside
  4. Traditional Medi-Cal for the indigent; there are income and asset limits, no requirement for a set-aside

These types of benefits are frequently confused, especially because the names are so similar.  For optimal settlement of a Workers Compensation case, you need to know the injured worker’s eligibility for these plans.

Error: Contact form not found.

The Elephant in the Room

Sometimes the issues the lawyers and adjusters are discussing are not what is most important to the Applicant.

Recently, in a pretty small case, the professionals told me the disagreements were about what had been paid and what was still due. The injured worker told me his biggest concern was that, although he had returned to modified duty, the employer had told him there was no more work for someone with his disability. The injured worker was terrified that he would be out of a job with no ability to get another one, but that is not what the lawyers were discussing.

Many times, the injured worker’s biggest issue is not one that is dispositive of any issue in the case, but, in fact, is the driver for the injured worker’s decisions– the proverbial elephant in the room the negotiators are trying to ignore.

Because these are often personal matters, the injured worker may not share these concerns with the employer’s side– or even the injured worker’s own lawyer.

  • The woman with a sick teen-aged son who desperately wanted to control her own industrial medical care, but was afraid that if she C&R’d her case, the lump sum payment would result in the family’s loss of Medi-Cal which provided care for the son.
  • The man  suffering from non-industrial cancer whose biggest concern was leaving an estate to support his wife.
  • The injured worker who wanted to return to his home country, but feared that expressing that desire would diminish the value of the claim.
These issues can often be discovered and resolved through mediation. Parties can express their concerns to the mediator confidentially. Once the mediator knows the real issue,  the mediator can often re-frame the issues to allow the parties to reach resolution– all without breaching confidentiality.

Error: Contact form not found.

How Mediation Saves Time, Money and Stress

How Mediation Saves Time, Money and Stress

Mediation of Workers Compensation claims is commonplace in some states and mandatory in some. Elsewhere, such as in California, claims professionals and attorneys are still starting to catch on to the benefits of mediation.

Multiple Appearances With Judge Can Accomplish Little

Budget cutbacks and increasing caseloads mean less time for cases to be heard by a workers compensation judge.  The result is multiple appearances which accomplish little.  This costs the employer money for the defense attorney’s fees and consequential costs from the inability to get a ruling.  For the injured worker’s attorney who typically will receive a fixed percentage contingent fee, each appearance without resolution decreases the attorney’s hourly rate of compensation.  The injured worker shares the employer’s frustration with the inability to get a ruling, with consequent stress and depression.  Sometimes this frustration causes the injured worker to seek new counsel with instructions to “be more aggressive.”

In contrast, mediation is as fast and efficient as the parties want it to be.  Mediations can be scheduled for a time and place of the parties’ convenience.   As much time as is necessary can be allocated for the mediation.  The issues to be resolved can be as narrow as definition of the industrial injury or as broad as conclusion of all indemnity, medical and penalty claims.

Mediation Facilitates Communication and Settlement

Mediation focuses the parties’ attention.  This contrasts with a court appearance where an attorney may be juggling appearances in multiple courtrooms.

Mediation can result in settlement when the parties are unable to negotiate a settlement on their own.  The presence of the neutral can facilitate communication.  Typically, parties will be together for some of the mediation and sometimes in separate sessions.  Separate sessions, known as caucuses, allow the mediator to exercise shuttle diplomacy.  Settlement can result even when the parties or attorneys are hostile.

The mediation may be the only opportunity the injured worker gets to tell the story of the injury and treatment.  For many injured workers, relating the narrative allows them to put it in the past and move on, a good result for all concerned.

 

 

FOUR REASONS TO AVOID THE CMS APPROVAL PROCESS FOR MSAs

Many Workers Compensation professionals believe they must secure approval of a Medicare Set-Aside (“MSA”) before they can close out medical benefits.  In California terms, professionals think they cannot complete a full Compromise & Release (C&R) without going through a lengthy administrative process.  This is not true.

1)                   MMSEA reporting makes approval unnecessary for Medicare beneficiaries.  Carriers and self-insureds already report at the beginning of a claim that they are assuming Ongoing Responsibility for Medicals and will report again when the claim is closed.  By the time an MSA is done, Medicare’s systems already block payments for treatment to those body parts.

2)                  Approval is not and never has been required.  The law merely requires that Medicare’s interest be taken into account, which is what you are doing when you incorporate the MSA terms into the C&R.

3)                  Approval does not protect anyone from liability.  When a non-Medicare-beneficiary Applicant self-administers and spends the money incorrectly, all parties could be subject to reimbursement liability.

4)                  The Approval process is unnecessarily torpedoing your settlements.

Do get an MSA Allocation report.  Do create a Set-Aside in accordance with the report.  Consider a structured settlement arrangement to make sure the Medicare Set-Aside is paid over the claimant’s anticipated lifetime.  Consider custodial administration for claims where it is cost-effective.  Seek CMS approval for settlements with a gross amount in excess of $250,000, but don’t let the process ham-string your settlement. 

 

This is an abstract of an article originally published at LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom Workers Compensation Law.  Find the full article at https://tinyurl.com/7f2c8n9.