IME Doctor Tricks

IME Doctor Tricks

IME Doctor Tricks: What Disability Insurance Lawyers Want You to Know

In the realm of disability insurance claims, the tactics employed by Independent Medical Examination (IME) doctors have become a critical area of concern. This article delves into the deceptive strategies often utilized by IME doctors to downplay the severity of disabilities and minimize insurance claims, and the relationship between the doctors and third party vendors, who connect the disability insurance companies to these doctors for hire.  By understanding these tactics, claimants can better equip themselves to navigate the IME process and safeguard their rights. Moreover, this study explores the legal landscape surrounding IME findings and the precedents that support claimants in challenging disputable assessments. Through a comprehensive analysis of IME doctor tricks, this article aims to shed light on crucial insights Jason Newfield want claimants to be aware of, ultimately empowering individuals to navigate this part of disability insurance claims with confidence and knowledge.

Understanding IME Doctor Tricks in Disability Insurance Claims

What strategies do IME doctors use to minimize disability claims?

IME doctors play a pivotal role in the assessment of disability claims, employing several strategies that often lead to the minimization or denial or termination of these claims. Primarily, they evaluate the claimant’s medical condition and their ability to work based on an examination they conduct independently on behalf of the insurer. This frequently limited evaluation culminates in a detailed report that outlines the claimant’s health status and work capability, providing insurers with critical information about the claim.   Even though it is only a snapshot in time, it is often utilized as a depiction of one’s full time work functionality.

However, these reports are frequently skewed unfavorably against claimants, giving insurers a substantial basis to justify the closure of disability claims. This bias stems from the inherent conflict of interest, as IME doctors are directly hired by insurance companies or their third party vendors. Motivated by this financially symbiotic relationship, IME physicians often aim to invalidate the claimant’s symptoms and diagnosis, a practice that significantly undermines the legitimacy of disability claims. Consequently, the report generated by IME doctors becomes a powerful tool for insurers, often serving as the primary basis for denying disability claims across a host of medical conditions. 

The tendency of IME doctors to provide opinions that are not supportive of the disability claim further exacerbates the challenges faced by claimants in securing their rightful benefits. This complex interplay between IME doctors’ strategies and the interests of insurers reveals the multifaceted challenges claimants encounter in the pursuit of disability claims.  Often, this one time examination is utilized to undermine strong objective diagnostic evidence supportive of impairment.

How can claimants prepare for an IME to protect their rights?

Understanding the potential adversarial role of IME doctors, claimants must prepare thoroughly for the IME to safeguard their rights and ensure the most favorable outcome. Proper preparation involves not only familiarizing oneself with the process but also taking proactive steps such as demanding a reputable IME center, as the choice can significantly impact the case’s resolution. Although the insurer may claim that they have the ability to select, good faith and fair dealing may guide the process to allow input.  Moreover, it is imperative for claimants to document every detail during and after the examination. 

Jason Newfield advises claimants to never attend an IME without someone who can take detailed notes, which can serve as crucial evidence in disputes over the IME report’s findings or in cases where the insurer uses the IME as a tool against the claimant. If possible, the IME should be videotaped or recorded.  We also recommend having an appointment with your own provider contemporaneously to develop findings.

Furthermore, given the insurer’s right to demand an IME and the potential consequences of non-compliance, such as denial of benefits, claimants must approach the IME with the understanding that it is a critical component of their claim’s adjudication process. This level of preparation ensures that claimants are not only ready to address any discrepancies that arise during the IME but also positioned to advocate effectively for their rights.  Ensuring support from the treating doctor is often critical at this stage.

We often see surveillance coupled with a demand to attend an IME – since the insurance company knows that the claimant will be compelled to leave the house, and thus they can ensure capturing some surveillance.  A claimant should return home immediately after the IME.

What legal precedents support claimants in disputes over IME findings?

Building on the essential preparation for an Independent Medical Examination, claimants facing disputes over IME findings have several legal precedents and strategies to support their position. Firstly, challenging the qualifications of the physician conducting the IME emerges as a fundamental step; if the physician lacks the appropriate qualifications, the findings of the IME report can be effectively contested. This approach underscores the importance of an IME doctor’s qualifications, as explicitly mandated, and provides a clear pathway for claimants to contest unfavorable findings. Having findings from your own doctor in the same time frame can often serve to undercut the IME findings.

Moreover, having the help of an experienced disability attorney becomes invaluable in navigating these disputes, as they can guide claimants through the process of contesting the IME doctor’s qualifications, findings, opinions, techniques and other issues. This legal support, coupled with the possibility of presenting additional medical evidence or seeking a second opinion, strengthens a claimant’s position in disputes over IME findings. Therefore, understanding one’s rights and options, including the right to videotape the IME for long-term disability claims processing, equips claimants to act promptly and decisively, ensuring that the IME is conducted fairly and preventing any disadvantage. 

This comprehensive approach, rooted in legal precedents and the right to challenge, provides a robust foundation for claimants to address and resolve disputes over IME findings effectively. Understanding the significant role played by IME doctors in assessing disability claims and the strategies they employ that often result in the minimization or denial of these claims is crucial for claimants. By delving into the inherent conflict of interest stemming from the direct hiring of IME doctors by insurance companies, the challenges faced by claimants in navigating the complex landscape of disability insurance disputes become evident. Furthermore, legal precedents and strategies that claimants can leverage to challenge IME findings and strengthen their position in such disputes are vital. Preparing for an IME with thorough documentation and strategic planning is essential in safeguarding claimants’ rights. 

If you are facing challenges with your disability insurance claim, don’t navigate this complex process alone. Contact Jason Newfield and the Newfield Law Group today to ensure you have the representation you need to secure your rightful benefits. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *