Hello There, Guest! Login Register
Index    |     Search    |     Members    |     Help

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Release to work with restrictions but no job to return to
#31
Do you mean med-legal? The defense pays for it. It sounds like you already received what they have in your file and provided you with termination letter. Every company is different with what they keep in an employees file. Sometimes it is only a few things like application etc.
I am not an attorney.Anything I write should not be considered legal advice.I am writing from my own personal experiences,which is not from any sort of legal background. You should consult with an attorney over legal issues. In California, if you cannot get an attorney you can consult with an I&A officer.
 
Reply
#32
(12-02-2018, 06:41 PM)California_Help Wrote: Do you mean med-legal? The defense pays for it. It sounds like you already received what they have in your file and provided you with termination letter. Every company is different with what they keep in an employees file. Sometimes it is only a few things like application etc.

Yes, med legal. I didn’t notice it auto-corrected to new.

I received one from IC and one from the employer. The one that the IC gave me is completely different. The only similarity is that they both have copies of the employee handbook.

I’m starting to worry about the qme report. Can the IC call the qme if his report hadn’t been mailed out? I know they’ve sent letters to everyone that I’m trying to get help from. I don’t know if I’m imagining this or if IC really do these sort of things.

From Edd, SDI, Department of Insurance, qme, pro and Ssdi. Everyone is helpful and professional at first but after a few months, I’m being treated like regular that doesn’t leave tips at dinner. I was surprised to see this letter in the IC’s file. If I was a third party and I read that letter, I too would find it difficult to support me. Can the employer or IC send this letter to the qme? Or would I be better off writing my own letter to combat their letter?

Thanks
 
Reply
#33
(12-02-2018, 08:40 PM)Lostandconfused Wrote:
(12-02-2018, 06:41 PM)California_Help Wrote: Do you mean med-legal? The defense pays for it. It sounds like you already received what they have in your file and provided you with termination letter. Every company is different with what they keep in an employees file. Sometimes it is only a few things like application etc.

Yes, med legal. I didn’t notice it auto-corrected to new.

I received one from IC and one from the employer. The one that the IC gave me is completely different. The only similarity is that they both have copies of the employee handbook.

I’m starting to worry about the qme report. Can the IC call the qme if his report hadn’t been mailed out? I know they’ve sent letters to everyone that I’m trying to get help from. I don’t know if I’m imagining this or if IC really do these sort of things.

From Edd, SDI, Department of Insurance, qme, pro and Ssdi. Everyone is helpful and professional at first but after a few months, I’m being treated like regular that doesn’t leave tips at dinner. I was surprised to see this letter in the IC’s file. If I was a third party and I read that letter, I too would find it difficult to support me. Can the employer or IC send this letter to the qme? Or would I be better off writing my own letter to combat their letter?

Thanks

The IC has to send you what they are planning to send to the QME 20 days in advance and you have the right to object.
I am not an attorney.Anything I write should not be considered legal advice.I am writing from my own personal experiences,which is not from any sort of legal background. You should consult with an attorney over legal issues. In California, if you cannot get an attorney you can consult with an I&A officer.
 
Reply
#34
(12-03-2018, 07:37 PM)California_Help Wrote:
(12-02-2018, 08:40 PM)Lostandconfused Wrote:
(12-02-2018, 06:41 PM)California_Help Wrote: Do you mean med-legal? The defense pays for it. It sounds like you already received what they have in your file and provided you with termination letter. Every company is different with what they keep in an employees file. Sometimes it is only a few things like application etc.

Yes, med legal. I didn’t notice it auto-corrected to new.

I received one from IC and one from the employer. The one that the IC gave me is completely different. The only similarity is that they both have copies of the employee handbook.

I’m starting to worry about the qme report. Can the IC call the qme if his report hadn’t been mailed out? I know they’ve sent letters to everyone that I’m trying to get help from. I don’t know if I’m imagining this or if IC really do these sort of things.

From Edd, SDI, Department of Insurance, qme, pro and Ssdi. Everyone is helpful and professional at first but after a few months, I’m being treated like regular that doesn’t leave tips at dinner. I was surprised to see this letter in the IC’s file. If I was a third party and I read that letter, I too would find it difficult to support me. Can the employer or IC send this letter to the qme? Or would I be better off writing my own letter to combat their letter?

Thanks

The IC has to send you what they are planning to send to the QME 20 days in advance and you have the right to object.

I was trying to figure out why or what the judge was expecting to hear or see from this qme. He explained labor code 4656© and said I can be mmi and be ttd after the mmi date as long as there’s a doctor that says I’m ttd.

He knows my ptp is in the mpn and he’s certified my sdi from eligible date from the doi. What was he expecting this qme eill day that will enable him to make a ruling? Surely, he should know that the qme will not write that I’m ttd from the date of injury. Isn’t the qme there to give his opinion on whether or not I’m mmi and if there is any impairment?

Can or does a qme write in his report that specifies retro- ttd dates? I What did he want to see in this qme’s report that will significantly impact his ruling? Even if this qme agrees with the first qme on the mmi date, I’m still within five years and can be ttd per the judge.

My theory is that he wants me to settle.
 
Reply
#35
(11-25-2018, 11:05 PM)Lostandconfused Wrote:
(11-25-2018, 10:48 PM)California_Help Wrote: This is very important. Is this the form you received?

https://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/DWCPropRegs/S...133.36.pdf

If it is I can try to walk you through the process on applying for the second benefit OR an I&A officer can help you.

Yes. But they only sent the first page. They downplayed it and said it wasn’t clear so I’m not sure where to go after that. I should be receiving the qme report soon so hopefully I can use that report to find an attorney.

This is in response to your last post. You wrote you received this notice but not the proof of service page. This is notification you qualify for the voucher but you need the proof of service page.
I am not an attorney.Anything I write should not be considered legal advice.I am writing from my own personal experiences,which is not from any sort of legal background. You should consult with an attorney over legal issues. In California, if you cannot get an attorney you can consult with an I&A officer.
 
Reply
#36
(12-14-2018, 12:17 AM)California_Help Wrote:
(11-25-2018, 11:05 PM)Lostandconfused Wrote:
(11-25-2018, 10:48 PM)California_Help Wrote: This is very important. Is this the form you received?

https://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/DWCPropRegs/S...133.36.pdf

If it is I can try to walk you through the process on applying for the second benefit OR an I&A officer can help you.

Yes. But they only sent the first page. They downplayed it and said it wasn’t clear so I’m not sure where to go after that. I should be receiving the qme report soon so hopefully I can use that report to find an attorney.

This is in response to your last post. You wrote you received this notice but not the proof of service page. This is notification you qualify for the voucher but you need the proof of service page.


I just saw this post. I will jump on this in the morning.

I’ve been too focus on the hearing next week. The judge told me that the terminated for cause is not the reason why I’m not receiving benefits but the IC is saying that it is.

I definitely won’t have enough time to hire an lawyer. I should have just went back to the one that was waiting to see the qme report before he takes my case.
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Employer required "full release" violates ADA law... 1171 7 10,769 04-13-2018, 08:31 PM
Last Post: Billy Miller
  Not Ready to Return to Work / Stress (New to Forum) jjjccefbr 8 4,197 02-04-2017, 01:07 AM
Last Post: 1171
  Not following work restrictions First-of-his-name 6 3,284 09-19-2016, 09:24 PM
Last Post: California_Help
  COMPROMISE & RELEASE injured man 3 2,539 06-18-2016, 09:43 PM
Last Post: 1171
  Back at work but now issued P& S with perm. Restrictions Worriedgirl 52 21,878 05-11-2016, 02:17 PM
Last Post: California_Help
  MS Contin ER (Extended release morphine freebird 66 81,665 02-21-2016, 12:58 PM
Last Post: 1171
  Return to work policy NY Osok 1 2,126 03-29-2015, 07:43 PM
Last Post: 1171
  MSC After compromise and release isitdone 1 2,561 12-23-2014, 01:03 PM
Last Post: 1171
  California- Request for release of info CaliMom 2 2,510 12-22-2014, 01:24 PM
Last Post: California_Help
  Notice of Ability to Return to Work jtaf 2 3,994 06-19-2014, 11:57 PM
Last Post: Timothy Belt

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)