I’m pretty sure I’ve written close to 200 articles, plus a White Paper on insurance surveillance. AND, I’ve been told here and there, “Oh Linda, you get so redundant sometimes, I don’t read all of your articles.” Still, I keep getting emails and phone calls from insureds who have been denied because of surveillance. I just don’t know what people are thinking these days.
Despite the best advice from a 25 year expert on claims management, and, playing the probability numbers, approximately 75% of those surveilled wind up with denied claims eventually. Therefore, it seems that I am in fact redeemed with the information I give about how influential surveillance is when in comes to claim denials.
Just within my own consulting services, I am often told, “I don’t care about surveillance, since I don’t do anything wrong.” If this is what YOU are thinking, then you missed the point entirely. It isn’t what the surveillance CD “sees”, it’s how it’s interpreted and used to support work capacity. Any insurance company will “interpret” surveillance to their own advantage after paying nearly $1,200 for a three-day observance.
How surveillance is interpreted is a subject for another post. But, I’ve already said on many occasions that, while insureds need not be in bed with comforters up to their noses, they do have to exhibit some sort of semblance to disability.
Some say, “But, I look as though I’m fine. No one would ever think I was disabled.” Well, your doctor must have given you some medical restrictions and limitations, which is why you’re on disability. If you are observed violating those R&Ls, insurers will say you have work capacity, And then, there are those who show their arrogance who, despite disability status, continue to engage in activities as though it doesn’t matter.
Please take my advice and do not exceed your medical restrictions and limitations. Do yourself a favor and take Murphy’s law seriously.
