June 26, 2015
66 Red Flags in Work Comp Claims
by Mark Davis
These red flags -- such as a report of an accident early Monday morning -- should cause an employer to investigate carefully.
This article started as another “Top Ten” list, but I quickly realized that, when looking for potential fraud or compensability issues in a workers’ compensation claim, there are many more than 10 red flags – I came up with 66. You can probably think of more. Please add them in the comments.
The following is a loosely organized list of red flags signaling potential fraud or abuse by a workers’ compensation claimant. Keep in mind that even if the claim has all of these red flags, this does not necessarily mean the claimant is committing fraud or that you have grounds to deny compensability of a claim. However, the presence of some of these red flags should cause you to investigate further. Also note that I am using the term “fraud” broadly to include general wrongdoing on the part of the claimant and not specifically referring to a legal cause of action.
Here we go:
- Late reporting – If an employee is really injured on the job, it is unlikely the employee will wait days or weeks to report the injury.
- The details of the accident are sketchy.
- The employee has difficulty recalling what happened.
- The employee changes the description of the accident when inconsistencies are pointed out.
- The nature of the injury is not consistent with the nature of the work done by the employee.
- The date, time or location of the accident is unknown or forgotten.
- The details of the accident are inconsistent with the employee job duties.
- The accident occurs in an area where the injured employee would not normally be.
- Fellow workers hear rumors circulating that the accident was not legitimate.
- The employee gives completely different versions of the accident to the employer, the adjuster and the doctor.
- The employee keeps modifying the story of what happened.
- The employee leaves out pertinent information.
- The details of the accident vary from medical report to medical report.
- There are no witnesses to the accident, and the employee normally works around other people.
- There are witnesses, but their version of the accident differs from the employee’s.
- The nature of the injury is unusual for the employee’s line of work.
- The employee’s co-workers express doubt that the accident occurred.
- The employee is disgruntled about some aspect of his job.
- The employee was demoted or passed over for a promotion.
- The employee is on the list to be laid off.
- The employee is on “positive improvement needed” status and is about to be terminated.
- The employee has had numerous prior employers.
- The “accident” occurs immediately before a strike, plant closing or the end of seasonal employment.
- The employee is a new hire.
- The accident occurs near the end of probationary period.
- The claimant is a seasonal worker.
- The employee has an early Monday morning accident before the supervisor or other employees see him on the job (meaning the accident might have occurred off the job over the weekend).
- The injured employee is not at home during the normal workday.
- The employee is always sleeping when the adjuster calls or cannot be disturbed.
- The employee’s family member is vague or noncommittal about when you can reach the employee.
- The employee uses the address of friends or family members and has no definite address or uses a Post Office box as an address.
- The employee’s spouse is not working and is drawing workers’ comp indemnity benefits, Social Security disability payments, welfare or unemployment insurance, and the employee wants the same lifestyle.
- The employee inquires about a settlement early in the claim process.
- The employee was having financial problems.
- The employee is nearing retirement age.
- The employee files for benefits in a state other than where the accident occurred.
- The employee fails to report other work income while drawing indemnity benefits.
- The employee took excessive time off just before the injury.
- The employee is in the middle of a divorce or other family disturbance.
- The Social Security number used by the employee belongs to someone else.
- The employee applies for Social Security benefits before the injury occurs.
- Income from workers’ comp, disability or other sources exceeds the employees prior after-tax income.
- The employee protests about returning to work and never seems to improve.
- All the injuries are subjective – pain without trauma, soft-tissue, emotional.
- The employee changes doctors frequently (“doctor shopping”) or changes doctors when released to return to work.
- The employee has excessive treatment for soft-tissue injuries.
- The medical treatment reported by the employee is different from the medical care stated in the medical reports.
- The nature of the medical treatment changes from one body part to another after the employee has been treating for a while.
- The employee misses medical appointments.
- The employee fails to show up for an independent medical examination.
- The employee refuses or delays diagnostic testing.
- There are whiteouts, corrections or erasures on medical forms submitted by the employee.
- Pain is exaggerated.
- Invalid or inconsistent effort is reported on the functional capacity evaluation.
- The employee has a history of multiple workers’ comp claims or reporting subjective claims of injury.
- The injury relates to a preexisting medical condition or health problem.
- The length of recovery is excessive for the nature of the injury.
- The employee who has been off work for a while has calluses on hands or grime under the fingernails.
- The medical reports reflect “muscular,” “tanned” or other adjectives that reflect that the employee is in good health.
- The employee is unable to work because of the injury but is seen painting her house, mowing the lawn, carrying heavy objects, etc.
- The employee has a high-risk hobby or does other activities involving considerable physical exertion.
- Surveillance reflects physical activity greater than what is reflected in the medical reports.
- The employee is unusually pushy to settle the workers’ comp claim.
- The employee has extensive medical knowledge but no training in the medical field, or uses extensive insurance terminology but has no work experience in the insurance field.
- The employee is a part of a group of employees using the same doctor and the same attorney for their workers’ comp injuries.
- The attorney’s letter of representation is the same day of the injury or even dated before the “injury.”
Please share your experiences in the comments!
Disclaimer: The information in this article does not constitute legal advice, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Every situation is unique, and I encourage you to seek legal advice from a licensed attorney for your particular situation.