Tag: 2014 News

Last week, Veterans Affairs released a report about its Workers Compensation program, which documented mismanagement of the Workers’ Compensation program similar to other programs administered by the VA. Oversight revealed that over 60% of all claims evaluated were not monitored properly. VA lacked a fraud detection process, which is surprising in light of VA’s perpetual focus on veterans potentially defrauding the disability compensation program. Apparently its own workers get a pass for fraud. OIG concluded VA could save over $92 million if it improves management of the program

This week it is learned that the agency responsible for investigating and enforcing immigration laws has not done a very good job of investigating its own employees’ claims of on-the-job injuries or enforcing the law that governs workers’ compensation, according to a new report summarized in Government Executive.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement paid five of its employees $1 million in workers’ comp after the employees were medically cleared to work, an audit by the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general found. One of those individuals has received more than $233,000 in compensation since medical personnel deemed the employee fit for work “several years ago,” the IG wrote. That was just one of many problems the IG found. In addition, agency supervisors did not document events accurately or completely; neglected to probe questionable claims; and failed to identify responsible third parties. “ICE has neither ensured effective claims processing oversight and case management nor returned employees to work at the earliest opportunity,” the IG reported.

The Federal Employees Compensation Act provides lost earnings, medical care and survivors’ benefits to civilian employees who have suffered work-related traumatic injuries or diseases. The Labor Department administers the program and adjudicates claims, but agencies must administer the programs internally, process claims and manage the compensation. Agencies are responsible for paying employees while claims are pending; if Labor denies a claim, the agency is to recover the payments by adjusting the employee’s leave balance or collecting the overpayment.

“ICE workers’ compensation specialists did not monitor the medical and return-to-work status of claimants, retain documentation associated with cases, return employees to work, or recover salaries for denied claims,” the IG wrote.

In a review of 132 case files tested for accuracy, auditors found that 19 percent did not include basic information, such as whether injuries were work-related. For example, one employee was injured eating lunch while away from work premises; another was in an accident three hours prior to the start of the work day — in neither case was there documentation showing any relationship to work. Nor did the files contain information about whether a third party could be financially liable for injuries, for example in cases where another driver struck an employee’s vehicle.

To address the problems, the IG recommended that Homeland Security develop and implement effective policies and procedures, and that ICE develop and implement a policy for returning employees to light work when they have medical restrictions. ICE and DHS concurred with the recommendations.

Santa Barbara County District Attorney Joyce E. Dudley announced the conviction of Francisco Javier Carranza, 44 years old, of Lompoc, California. Carranza pied guilty to two felony counts of Workers’ Compensation Fraud and was sentenced to 100 days in jail, was placed on three years of felony probation and ordered to pay more than $68,000 in restitution.

Carranza filed a workers’ compensation claim for an injury sustained while working for Action Roofing Company, a local Santa Barbara business. Suspicions arose when Carranza claimed he was not getting better despite years of medical treatment and benefit payments. Carranza complained of ongoing pain and claimed he was incapable of working or walking without the use of a device. Surveillance video proved Carranza’s claims were fraudulent.

Carranza’s fraudulent claims resulted in losses to the State Compensation Insurance Fund totaling $36,519.66 and to Action Roofing in the sum of$31,710.21. District Attorney Joyce Dudley noted that, “Engaging in workers compensation fraud negatively impacts our entire community, as well as individuals and their families who rely upon this system when they become and remain injured on the job. For these reasons, our office will continue to rigorously prosecute these crimes.”

A story in the Desert Sun claims that doctors in Southern California have implanted counterfeit screws and rods, ginned up in a small machine shop, into the backs of thousands of injured workers, according to lawsuits filed throughout the state. Some doctors who used the bogus hardware allegedly took kickbacks including cash and private plane rides, while middlemen and hospitals profited by wildly inflating the cost of the screws, according to one suit filed in Sacramento. The allegations deepen the scandal surrounding a Corona del Mar hospital executive who pleaded guilty in April to paying doctors to bring in patients as part of a $500 million insurance scam. The executive, Michael Drobot, also admitted to bribing former state Sen. Ronald Calderon to keep huge insurance payments flowing.

The cases revolve around spinal fusion surgeries, in which rods and screws are implanted in the back to relieve pain. The state’s workers’ compensation system long paid a premium for hardware used in the surgeries until a loophole was closed by recent legislation. The latest lawsuit, filed in mid-June in Los Angeles, alleges that the knockoff spinal implants could harm patients because they could get an infection or react to metal that is not surgical grade. The screws also might loosen or fail. Some of the bogus screws cost $300 to make but were billed at as much as $12,500 each, records say.

“It’s probably the worst example where fraud has progressed from being a financial crime to hurting people for profit,” said Thomas Fraysse, an Oakland attorney on the case. “It’s beyond unethical.” Law firms in the Bay Area and Los Angeles plan to continue to file cases on behalf of people with counterfeit implants studding their backs. A contractor for Spinal Solutions, the firm accused of distributing the implants, and an attorney for the machine shop’s owner deny the allegations, saying it is impossible that the elderly machinist mass-produced the hardware.

The latest lawsuit accuses defendants of fraud and battery, saying the hardware has put the life of the patient, Arthur Golia of Riverside, at risk. Golia had seven counterfeit devices implanted in his spine, according to the suit. It follows a similar January case, which alleges that a Los Angeles man had medical implants from the mom-and-pop machine shop in Temecula put in his back in 2011. One of the screws broke, requiring David Solomon to undergo a second surgery in 2013. He has ongoing pain and loss of movement, the lawsuit says. Golia trusted his doctor to use medical implants approved by the Food and Drug Administration, his lawsuit states. Instead, the case alleges, Dr. Jack Akmakjian used counterfeit implants in Golia’s back because he was being paid a kickback to do so. Separately, the Medical Board of California accused Akmakjian in April of injecting unsafe amounts of steroids in patients and overprescribing drugs.

A separate whistleblower lawsuit alleges that many of the patients with fake implants may not have needed the surgery at all. According to that May 2012 suit, they were the collateral damage of a massive scheme to defraud insurers, involving Drobot, former owner of Pacific Hospital of Long Beach. Drobot admitted to paying doctors kickbacks of up to $15,000 to operate in his hospital. He also admitted to paying bribes to Calderon to protect a law allowing hospitals to bill insurance providers for the full cost of spinal implants. Calderon, a Montebello Democrat, has pleaded not guilty to corruption charges. Drobot’s sentencing is scheduled for December, according to news reports.

Spinal Solutions LLC, a now-shuttered Murrieta company, is accused of distributing and inflating the cost of the hardware in the Golia lawsuit and the whistleblower claim. The firm’s owner, Roger K. Williams, is accused of passing off the counterfeit rods and screws as FDA-approved even though they were made at the local tool shop. The case says Williams, his wife at the time and a key staffer hid or destroyed records that revealed the true origin of the hardware. According to the lawsuits, Spinal Solutions asked William Crowder, owner of Crowder Machine and Tool of Temecula, to make the rods and screws.

Thomas Mansor, an independent contractor who worked for Spinal Solutions and attended surgeries with their products, said the allegations sound “bogus.” Mansor said he went to Crowder’s machine shop for repairs on tools like screwdrivers. But he said Crowder didn’t have the equipment or capacity to churn out the spinal implants. Crowder sued Spinal Solutions last July, saying the firm owed him $29,900 “to machine, repair and prototype” tools for doctors. Crowder attached a one-year, $50,000 contract with the implant firm to his suit. Crowder won a judgment against Spinal Solutions because it did not respond to the suit.

The FDA cited Spinal Solutions in 2012 for a variety of quality control violations. Last year, the agency announced that the company was recalling spinal implants because problems with the products “could cause patient harm due to implant breakage, movement, or inadequate sterilization.”

In June 2013, a federal grand jury returned a 27-count indictment against Terrill Eugene Brown, 61, of Visalia, charging him with conspiracy to dispense oxycodone, dispensing of oxycodone and hydrocodone, and structuring currency transactions to avoid bank reporting requirements, According to the indictment, Brown, a medical doctor formerly licensed in California, sold prescriptions for large quantities of highly addictive, frequently diverted prescription drugs, including oxycodone and hydrocodone, without medical necessity. Brown sold prescriptions to customers that did not have a legitimate medical purpose and were not in the usual course of his professional practice. Brown deposited the cash earned from this into different personal bank accounts in a manner designed to avoid currency transaction reporting requirements.

Brown pleaded guilty on July 7, 2014. He will remain out of custody until his sentencing date. He is scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill on September 22, 2014. Brown faces a maximum statutory penalty of 20 years in prison and a $1 million fine for illegally causing the dispensing of a controlled substance, and a maximum sentence of 10 years and a $500,000 fine for structuring currency transactions to avoid a reporting requirement. The actual sentence, however, will be determined at the discretion of the court after consideration of any applicable statutory factors and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, which take into account a number of variables. Brown agreed to forfeit more than $182,000 and three BMW sedans that were involved in or obtained as a result of his criminal activity.

This case is being brought as part of Operation Footprint, a nationwide law enforcement initiative led by the U.S. Attorney’s Offices, the IRS-Criminal Investigation, the DEA, and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. Operation Footprint targets large drug trafficking organizations by identifying the transfer of drug proceeds through financial institutions, bulk cash smuggling and other forms of money transfers. Operation Footprint is focused on bringing criminal charges based on Bank Secrecy Act violations in addition to violations of the Controlled Substances Act and the Money Laundering Control Act.

This case is also the product of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF), a focused multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional task force investigating and prosecuting the most significant drug trafficking organizations throughout the United States by leveraging the combined expertise of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies.

Prior to the 2013 indictment, Brown was the subject of Board of Medicine investigations that ultimately led to the surrender of his medical license. On September 22, 2011, the Medical Board of California conducted an undercover operation at his office located at 5756 N. Marks Ave. #161 in Fresno California. The undercover operative was a female Medical Board Investigator, who utilized an undercover identity of a patient. During this undercover operation, Brown personally collected $200 cash and issued a medical marijuana recommendation, together with a prescription for 180 10-325 Norco tablets. Brown did not review any medical records and did not conduct any physical examination whatsoever.

Rudy Gallardo’s claim of industrial injury to his low back and right shoulder while employed by Southern California Edison was settled by compromise and release. Before the settlement he received two back surgeries performed at Huntington Hospital. What remained to be adjudicated was a dispute concerning the lien claim of Huntington Hospital in the amount of $43,870 pursuant to the Official Medical Fee Schedule (OMFS) in addition to the $18,050 already paid by Edison. Huntington initially billed $130,610.59 for the services it provided, but was paid $18,050.00 by Blue Cross of California on behalf of Edison. Huntington filed a workers’ compensation lien for the $112,560.59 balance it claimed was due, but it was subsequently stipulated that the total fee allowed by the OMFS is $61,920.00, and Huntington amended its claim to $43,870.00, which is the difference between the $18,050.00 paid by BCC and the $61,920.00 allowed by the OMFS.

The fee dispute was presented at a lien trial. Two contracts were received into the record. The first was a 23 page January 1, 2002 “Comprehensive Contracting Hospital Agreement” (CCHA) made between Blue Cross of California and Huntington. The second was a seven page August 1, 2006 “Workers’ Compensation Network Access Agreement” made between Edison and “BC Life and Health Insurance Company,” which is a Blue Cross of California subsidiary.

The WCJ issued her December 23, 2013 decision finding that defendant was obligated to pay the additional $43,870.00 to Huntington pursuant to the OMFS. Edison Petitioned for Reconsideration which was granted in the panel decision of Rudy Gallardo v Southern California Edison and Huntington Hospital.

Defendant contended that the WCAB lacks jurisdiction over the fee dispute and that it is not liable to Huntington for the additional amount because it earlier paid $18,050 to Huntington in accordance with the express agreement between Huntington and Blue Cross of California (BCC), which established the amount to be paid consistent with Labor Code sections 4906 and 5304.1.The WCAB panel agreed and reversed.

Labor Code Section 5304 provides as follows: “The appeals board has jurisdiction over any controversy relating to or arising out of Sections 4600 to 4605 inclusive, unless an express agreement fixing the amounts to be paid for medical, surgical or hospital treatment as such treatment is described in those sections has been made between the persons or institutions rendering such treatment and the employer or insurer.”

In prior decisions the WCAB held that the language in the Blue Cross ‘Comprehensive Contracting Hospital Agreement,’ expressly provides for Blue Cross to contract with ‘Other Payors’ to provide access to a hospital’s medical services. Such ‘Other Payors’ are noted to consist of other insurers, including workers’ compensation insurers. (See e.g., Recovery Resources, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals. Bd (Gordon) (2009) 74 Cal. Comp. Cases 881 [writ denied]; See Ferguson v. Handee Market (2005 Cal. Wrk. Comp. P.D. Lexis 22[)]; Waters v. Los Angeles Clippers (2005 Cal. Wrk. Comp. P.D. Lexis 15.)

“The $18,050 fee paid by defendant to Huntington by way of the chain of contracts was pursuant to an “express agreement fixing the amounts to be paid” as described in section 5304, and under that section the WCAB does not have jurisdiction over the fee dispute. Huntington’s contention that BCC did not follow the terms of their contract in accordance with section 4906 does not change the fact that the WCAB is without jurisdiction because there is an express agreement fixing the amounts to be paid. A different forum must be used by Huntington to adjudicate its breach of contract claims.”