IMA & DDS

The questionable relationship between IMA and the State agency  continues, without any meaningful oversight.  It seems nobody is concerned about the thousands of unnecessary exams.

We were retained by a 55 year old pharmacy tech from West Babylon with progressive orthopedic impairments following a motor vehicle accident, after her Social Security Disability (“SSD”) application was denied.  As usual, the claimant was sent a letter stating that it was “necessary for” her to be examined by an unnamed doctor from IMA Disability Services.

In light of the persistent COVID-19 pandemic, we advised the State agency that it was more important now than ever to comply with the regulation concerning a consultative examination (“CE”).  After all, according to Social Security’s website, they continue to conduct many hearings by telephone due to COVID-19.  We advised the State agency to make a decision because the claimant was not willing to postpone a CE with IMA.  Additionally, we advised the State agency that whatever information it believed was needed from IMA, could be requested from the claimant’s medical sources, who are the preferred source pursuant to the regulations.

The claimant did not attend a CE with IMA.  We received a Notice of Award today for the claimant, who provided all her medical records and reports from her doctors.  The State agency’s motivation for disregarding the CE regulations remains unclear.  However, it is clear that the State agency’s letters asserting the IMA CEs are “necessary” is untrue.  The claimant’s application should never have been denied in the first place.

 

Hartford Loses Again

Last month’s post, briefly discussed McQuillin v. Hartford, which the Second Circuit issued following an oral argument that sharply criticized Hartford.  The decision also decisively rejected Hartford’s argument that it did not have to decide if a claimant is entitled to receive long term disability (“LTD”) benefits in 45 days.

Despite being trounced by the Second Circuit panel at oral argument and in its decision, Hartford decided to file a forty-two (42) page petition in support of a rehearing.  The Second Circuit saw fit to respond to Hartford’s petition in only a couple of sentences:

Appellee Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, filed a petition for rehearing en banc.  The active members of the Court have considered the request for rehearing en banc.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is denied.

 

 

Long COVID Strugglers

Almost all of us either had COVID, or know someone who has contracted it.  Most people recover and are able to resume their normal lives.  However, a growing number of people are left with debilitating symptoms months after they have had the virus.  The medical community is advising people with long COVID to rest as much as they can, as they believe that is the best medicine to regain their health.  There are a myriad of long COVID symptoms, some of which are severe fatigue, memory and cognitive problems, pain and general malaise.  Even the slightest exertion seems to aggravate these symptoms.

At present, Social Security Disability seems to be the only answer, but waiting for a decision can take months, if not years.  Hopefully, the Social Security Administration can make some long overdue changes to the program that would help these long COVID strugglers, as well as anyone else who is unable to work a full-time job due to a medical illness, so they can receive disability benefits and Medicare in a more timely manner.