Mike Morse on TLV

Hello, Fellow Trial Lawyers!

In the latest Trial Lawyer View podcast, host Jason Lazarus sits down with Mike Morse, founder of one of the nation’s largest personal injury firms. Mike opens up about how the unexpected loss of his father shaped his journey and fueled his firm’s incredible success. Discover the strategies that have propelled Mike’s firm to new heights, including insights from his book Fireproof, and learn how he uses the Traction model to streamline operations and enhance client satisfaction. Whether you’re looking to scale your practice or improve your team dynamics, this episode is packed with invaluable advice from a true industry leader. Don’t miss it!

Thanks for listening!

Jason D. Lazarus, Esq.

Lien Resolution in a Nutshell

In the complicated world of personal injury practice, lien resolution is a pivotal yet often daunting aspect of the resolution process for cases. For trial lawyers, the task of the resolution of various liens can be both challenging and crucial to maximizing the client’s net recovery. The evolving complexity of healthcare reimbursement systems and the rigorous regulatory requirements of government plans necessitate a meticulous approach to lien resolution.

Understanding Lien Resolution

Lien resolution requires a detailed process for addressing and negotiating claims made by healthcare providers, government agencies, and other entities against a portion of a settlement in a personal injury case. These claims, or liens, must be resolved to ensure that settlement funds are distributed to the injured party free of any future claims by healthcare providers or insurance plans. Failure to resolve liens correctly can lead to significant financial and legal consequences for everyone involved.

The Importance of Lien Resolution

  1. Client Recovery: The accurate and efficient resolution of liens is essential for maximizing the amount of settlement funds available to the client. A less-than-optimal lien resolution process can drastically reduce the client’s net recovery, creating more financial strain post-settlement and less satisfaction with the outcome.
  2. Compliance: Adhering to legal and ethical requirements is crucial. Different types of liens—such as those from Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA, FEHBA, Military, hospital, and private health insurance—come with specific resolution processes and legal issues. Understanding and complying with these processes/laws is vital to avoid complications.
  3. Financial Responsibility: Appropriate resolution helps prevent financial liabilities for all involved parties. Incorrect handling can result in claims against settlement funds even after they’ve been disbursed, potentially leading to additional financial burdens.
  4. Professional Reputation: Efficiently resolving liens not only satisfies clients but also enhances an attorney’s reputation. Positive outcomes and satisfied clients often translate into more referrals and better professional reviews online.

Lien resolution is more than just a procedural necessity; it is a critical element in ensuring that clients receive the maximum net recovery from their settlements. For trial lawyers, mastering this aspect of resolution is essential for achieving optimal outcomes and maintaining a high standard of professional excellence.  In many situations, it may be best to outsource this function to reduce liability, eliminate internal costs of resolution, and get the best net recovery for the client. 

If you want to learn much, much more about lien resolution and outsourcing, click here to download our Outsourcing & Lien Resolution Guide for Trial Lawyers.  To learn more about partnering with Synergy for lien resolution click HERE

Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., CSSC, MSCC | CEO

Maximizing Efficiency and Profitability, in Personal Injury Law Firms Through the Use of the EOS Traction Model and Strategic Outsourcing

Introduction

In the world of personal injury law practice, balancing profitability with exceptional operational efficiency poses a significant challenge. You want to deliver world-class customer experience while getting the balance right with running your firm efficiently as well as profitably.  To navigate this challenge, law firms can utilize the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS) Traction model in combination with outsourcing. This dynamic combined approach helps streamline operations, boost efficiency and ultimately drive profitability. This blog discusses, at a high level, how personal injury law firms can incorporate these strategies to achieve outcomes.

Understanding the Fundamentals of the EOS Traction Model

The EOS Traction model, crafted by Gino Wickman offers a framework for managing and optimizing businesses. While some may feel a law practice is different, the Traction model works with any business enterprise.  It revolves around six core elements:

  • Vision: Establishing a shared vision for the firm to align all team members toward objectives that need to be achieved.  Think of something like the mission to help injured parties recover just compensation! 
  • People: Ensuring that individuals are in roles to maximize productivity and job satisfaction.  Making sure the right people are in the right seats within your firm to deliver on your vision.
  • Data: Utilizing metrics and data to inform decision making processes and monitor performance.  Looking at critical KPIs within your business (law practice) to ensure you are achieving what you have set out to do. 
  • Issues: Promptly identifying and resolving issues to uphold operations.  Every business, and your law firm, is no different, has operational issues that need to be solved so this process is an incredibly important one. 
  • Process: Documenting and refining fundamental processes to guarantee consistency and efficiency.  The key to consistency and longevity, as well as scale, is documented processes.  Especially important for firms in growth mode or looking to grow. 
  • Traction: Enforcing disciplined execution and accountability to reach the firm’s goals.

By embracing the EOS Traction model, personal injury law firms can establish a foundation to drive continuous growth and profitability. While it may not be as straightforward as it seems at first glance there’s no need to worry because numerous EOS experts, with knowledge of law firm operations, can play a pivotal role in implementing EOS within your practice.

Incorporating Strategic Outsourcing

While the EOS Traction model offers a structure for efficiency, strategic outsourcing complements it by taking specific tasks off your team’s place and giving to an external team that are specialists. Outsourcing enables law firms to concentrate on their core strengths while tapping into know-how for functions that can be handled more effectively by experts. Key potential areas for outsourcing tasks many personal injury law firms do inhouse today include:

Lien Resolution

  1. Expertise and Efficiency: Outsourcing lien resolution to specialized firms ensures compliance with complex regulations and maximizes lien reductions, allowing the firm to focus on client advocacy.  It removes the burden of administrative work from a law firm’s staff, creating more efficiency and profitability for the law firm. 
  2. Risk Mitigation: Specialized lien resolution groups stay updated on legal developments, reducing the risk of errors and compliance issues when outsourced to an experienced lien resolution company.

Medical Records Review

  1. Detailed Analysis: Outsourcing the review of medical records to experts ensures thorough and accurate documentation, supporting stronger outcomes.
  2. Time Savings: External reviewers can handle large volumes of records quickly, freeing up internal resources for other critical tasks.

Marketing and Lead Generation

  1. Targeted Campaigns: Professional marketing firms can design and execute targeted campaigns to attract potential clients, increasing the firm’s caseload and revenue.
  2. Analytics and Optimization: Marketing experts provide insights and analytics to optimize campaigns, ensuring the best return on investment.

Maximizing Profitability through EOS Traction and Outsourcing Integration

When integrated, the EOS Traction model and strategic outsourcing create a powerful synergy that drives efficiency and profitability in personal injury law firms. Here’s how:

  1. Core Competency Focus

By outsourcing specialized tasks, law firms can focus on their core competencies, such as client representation and legal strategy, ensuring higher quality service and better case outcomes.

  • Scalability and Adaptability

Outsourcing provides scalability, allowing firms to handle increasing caseloads without the need for significant internal resource additions. This flexibility supports growth and profitability.

  • Data Driven Decision Making

The EOS Traction model emphasizes data-driven decision-making. By developing key metrics for operations, firms gain access to advanced analytics and insights, informing strategic decisions and optimizing performance.

  • Optimizing Operations

By documenting and fine-tuning procedures using the EOS framework, operations can be streamlined. This helps to minimize inefficiencies, reduce expenses and boost productivity.

  • Enhanced Client Satisfaction

Efficient operations lead to faster resolution of cases and improved client outcomes.  This in turn results in higher client satisfaction and positive testimonials/Google reviews, which are crucial for the firm’s continued growth.

Conclusion

Combining the EOS Traction model with strategic outsourcing offers personal injury law firms a comprehensive approach to achieving operational excellence and profitability. By focusing on core competencies, leveraging external expertise, and implementing disciplined execution and accountability, firms can navigate the complexities of personal injury law firm practice with greater success. This approach not only enhances profitability but also ensures sustained growth and client satisfaction, positioning the firm for long-term success in a competitive market.

If you want to learn more about outsourcing lien resolution to Synergy, go to www.partnerwithsynergy.com 

To learn more about the Traction/EOS model go to www.eosworldwide.com 

Calculating Future Medical Damages

Personal injury attorneys will often rely on Medical Cost Projections (MCP) when seeking to establish future medical damages in their cases. The MCP provides a roadmap of the future injury-related care and an estimate of the cost of such services. This article provides a comprehensive overview of healthcare billing and the methodology used by allocators in pricing future medical services.

Overview of Healthcare Billing

The U.S. healthcare system is often criticized for its complex and opaque billing practices. One of the most significant flaws in the U.S. healthcare billing system is the lack of transparency in pricing. Unlike other industries where consumers can easily compare prices, healthcare providers often do not disclose the costs of services upfront. The cost of identical medical services can vary widely between providers and even within the same facility, depending on factors such as location, the provider’s negotiation with insurers, and the patient’s insurance plan. Billing is often fragmented and comes from multiple providers for a single episode of care, including hospitals, physicians, labs, and other ancillary services.

The use of CPT codes for billing introduces complexity and potential for error. CPT codes are standardized numeric codes maintained by the American Medical Association (AMA) used to describe medical, surgical, and diagnostic services. These codes are essential for:

  • Communicating uniform information about medical services and procedures between healthcare providers, insurers, and patients.
  • Facilitating accurate billing and efficient claims processing.
  • Ensuring compliance with healthcare regulations.

Upcoding occurs when healthcare providers submit claims using CPT codes that represent more extensive or higher-cost services than those provided. This practice can result in increased reimbursement from insurers, leading to higher costs for payers and patients. Examples of upcoding include the following: billing for a comprehensive office visit when only a brief consultation was conducted, coding for a more complex surgical procedure than was performed and submitting codes for services not medically necessary or not provided.

Pricing in the medical field involves various factors with the fundamental components being the cost of services and the need to generate a profit.  Direct costs consist of medical supplies, equipment, and labor, while indirect costs include facility maintenance, administrative expenses, and insurance.  Medical providers also consider the prevailing market rates for similar services in their geographic area. In regions with higher competition, prices may be lower to attract patients. Conversely, in areas with fewer medical facilities, providers may have more pricing power.

The payer mix, or the proportion of revenue coming from private insurance, government programs (such as Medicare and Medicaid), and self-paying patients, also significantly influences pricing decisions. Medicare and Medicaid typically reimburse at lower rates than private insurers. To compensate for these lower reimbursements, providers may increase prices for services billed to private insurance or self-paying patients. The agreed-upon rates between insurance companies and providers are often influenced by the provider’s reputation, specialty, and bargaining power. Larger healthcare systems or providers with unique specialties may command higher rates.

Patient demographics and socioeconomic factors also play a role in pricing decisions. Providers may adjust prices based on the demographic makeup of their patient population. In affluent areas, higher charges might be feasible, while in lower-income communities, providers might offer discounts or sliding scale fees to accommodate patients’ financial capabilities.

Medical Pricing Databases

Allocators that prepare MCPs use medical pricing databases such as, but not limited to, Medata, FAIR Health and Healthcare Bluebook in estimating the cost of the future injury-related medical services. These databases collect, analyze, and disseminate data on healthcare costs across various providers, regions, and types of services. They aggregate pricing information from insurance claims, Medicare data, and other sources to provide comprehensive cost estimates for a wide range of medical services.

Medata is a leading medical pricing database known for its extensive and detailed cost information. It provides real-time data on medical procedures, treatments, and services from common procedures to specialized care, and offers pricing information segmented by geographic region, type of provider, and payer type. FAIR Health is another prominent medical pricing database which compiles data from millions of healthcare claims nationwide, offering a comprehensive overview of costs. Healthcare Bluebook provides transparent pricing data for healthcare services, helping users understand fair market prices. This tool is particularly useful for comparing costs across different providers and ensuring that estimates reflect realistic market conditions.

MCPs may be customized to reflect a specific percentage of the usual and customary rates over an individual’s life expectancy. The medical pricing databases also provide Medicare fee schedule pricing as well as workers’ compensation state specific medical fee schedule rates. There are other databases for the pricing of drugs.

Conclusion

Medical Cost Projections play an important role in quantifying future medical treatment costs. By leveraging the MCP, lawyers can enhance their case preparation and negotiation strategies, ultimately securing better results for their clients. Contact Synergy to learn more about how our MCP report can simplify the negotiation of future medical care for your case.

Written by: Rasa Fumagalli, JD, MSCC, CMSP-F

Glenn B. Fair on TLV

Hello, Fellow Trial Lawyers!

In the latest episode of Trial Lawyer View, host Jason Lazarus speaks with Glenn Fair, whose military and law enforcement background profoundly influences his approach to personal injury law. Glenn discusses the discipline and leadership skills he brings to his practice, emphasizing the importance of connecting with clients and meeting their needs with care and support. He shares practical advice on trial preparation and handling difficult cases, drawing from his recent success with a $2.2 million verdict. He also explores how technology enhances his firm’s efficiency. Glenn’s insights offer valuable strategies for attorneys aiming to improve client advocacy and firm operations. With a focus on his learns from his life before becoming a lawyer, to outsourcing and using technology to its fullest, you will get some great tips. Including some key insights about voir dire. 

Thanks for listening!

Jason D. Lazarus, Esq.

Achieving Total Medicare Compliance: Essential Steps for Personal Injury Lawyers

Navigating Medicare compliance is a critical task when handling personal injury settlements involving Medicare beneficiaries. Ensuring total compliance with the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSP) requires a strategic approach and thorough understanding of the law/regulations. This blog post is a basic guide for trial lawyers when it comes to Medicare Secondary Payer compliance. 

Identifying and Reporting Medicare Beneficiaries

The first step in Medicare compliance is to identify clients who are current Medicare beneficiaries or those reasonably expected to become beneficiaries within 30 months. Implement a screening method to flag these cases within your firm. Once identified, contact Medicare and report the settlement to obtain a Conditional Payment letter and ultimately a Final Demand. Carefully audit the Conditional Payment Letter and use the compromise/waiver process to achieve further reductions post payment of the Final Demand. Additionally, identify and resolve any Part C/Medicare Advantage Organization (MAO) liens.

Release Language

Release language is a vital component in Medicare compliance. Avoid overbearing or irrelevant language that can negatively impact your client. For example, make sure that the release doesn’t take away specific rights related to their government benefits.  Also, ensure the release does not make the settlement contingent on CMS approval or other requirements that have no legal basis.

Early Intervention and Collaboration

Start the compliance process early in your case. Confirm disability eligibility with Social Security and gather all relevant insurance and government assistance documentation. Collaborate with opposing counsel on the information reported under the Mandatory Insurer Reporting (MIR) requirements. Ensure proper ICD codes are included to avoid future Medicare claim rejections.

Advising Clients on Medicare Futures Implications – Education and Expert Consultation

When dealing with Medicare beneficiaries, it’s crucial to assess whether future medical expenses are being paid as part of the settlement. If so, then:  Consult, Advise and Document.

Educate your clients about the impact of not setting aside funds for future Medicare-covered expenses. Proper documentation of all compliance steps is crucial. Consult with experts to navigate the complexities of the MSP, including lien identification, conditional payment resolution, MSA creation, and release language. Expert guidance is essential to avoid mistakes that could lead to client dissatisfaction or legal malpractice claims.

If clients opt out of creating a Medicare Set-Aside (MSA), ensure they acknowledge the implications in writing. For those who choose to create an MSA, work with specialized companies like Synergy to perform the analysis and document the process accurately.

Avoid Complications at Settlement

The key takeaway is to manage Medicare compliance issues proactively to avoid disputes that could land you in federal court. Ensure proper ICD codes are reported and evaluate the necessity of an MSA with your client. Collaborate with experts and consider the potential for using the MSA as a negotiation tool to enhance settlement value. Carefully word the release to protect your client’s interests and avoid inappropriate language.

Conclusion

By following these steps, you can achieve total Medicare compliance, safeguard your clients’ interests, and navigate the complexities of the MSP with confidence. Proper planning and expert consultation are paramount to ensuring a smooth settlement process and avoiding legal pitfalls.

Turn to Synergy for experts who can help create a Medicare compliance strategy for your firm to mitigate liability risks and protect clients.  Inadequate compliance processes can result in financial liabilities and worse yet damage to your firm’s reputation.  Having a Synergy expert perform a Medicare Expert Case Evaluation (MECE) helps you educate your client related to future potential denial of care and then document your file appropriately.  Ensure your Medicare processes protect both your clients and your practice by partnering with Synergy for total Medicare compliance. 

Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., CSSC, MSCC

Using Contract Law to Combat an ERISA Health Insurance Lien on Your Settlement

Settling a personal injury case can be a moment of relief for both the plaintiff and their attorney. However, a significant hurdle often remains: resolving health insurance liens. These liens can significantly impact the final recovery amount for your client, making it crucial to address them effectively. This article focuses on ERISA plans and their policy documents related to liens.

Understanding Health Insurance Liens

When a plaintiff receives medical treatment for injuries related to a personal injury claim, their health insurance provider often pays the medical bills. In return, the insurer may have a lien interest in the amount of the medical expenses covered, providing a right to reimbursement from any settlement or judgment. This reimbursement claim, known as a health insurance lien, is based on the contractual and statutory rights of the insurer.

Steps to Resolving Health Insurance Liens

  1. Identify and Notify All Potential Lienholders: Early in the case, identify all entities that may assert a lien. This includes health insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid, and any other potential third-party payers. Notify these entities, in writing, of the pending litigation and request detailed lien information.
  2. Review Plan Documents and Lien Claims: Carefully examine the insurance policy or plan documents to understand the basis and amount of the lien. Check for any errors or inaccuracies, and for relatedness in the lien claim. It’s also essential to scrutinize whether the lien is enforceable under federal or state law.
  3. Negotiate the Lien Amount: Engage in negotiations with the lienholder. Highlight any equitable considerations, such as the extent of the damages, the plaintiff’s overall recovery, and the attorney’s fees and costs. Insurers should compromise on the lien amount when a persuasive argument is presented.
  4. Utilize the Common Fund Doctrine: This doctrine can often reduce the lien amount by requiring the lienholder to share in the attorney’s fees and costs. The rationale is that the lienholder benefits from the attorney’s efforts to recover the settlement.
  5. Document Everything: Keep meticulous records of all communications, negotiations, and agreements related to the lien. This documentation can be crucial if disputes arise later.

ERISA Liens

Plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) often have strong reimbursement rights. These plans, provided by private employers, can preempt state laws, making them particularly powerful. It is their policy language that controls the strength of their reimbursement right. The key issues include:

  • Federal vs. State Law: Self-funded ERISA plans can assert strong reimbursement rights that preempt state anti-subrogation laws, limiting the avenues for reduction or negotiation of the lien. Fully insured ERISA plans can also assert strong reimbursement rights even if those plans are indeed subject to state law. Some states allow a fully insured ERISA plan to override state law that would limit their reimbursement. Because of this, regardless of the funding status, obtaining all plan documents is crucial.
  • Plan Terms Interpretation: Courts often require strict adherence to the terms of the ERISA plan documents. The McCutchen case made this abundantly clear for self-funded ERISA plans. Understanding and interpreting these terms correctly is essential.

Right to Obtain the Plan Documents

Under ERISA, plan participants have specific rights to obtain plan documents from their plan administrators. These rights are crucial for participants to understand their benefits, how the plan operates, and their entitlements. Section 104(b)(4) of ERISA, codified as 29 U.S.C. § 1024(b)(4), outlines these rights.

The Plan Documents should be obtained directly from the Plan Administrator and not the insurance carrier or the subrogation vendor.

  1.  Written Request:
    • Plan participants or beneficiaries can request copies of certain plan documents in writing from the plan administrator.
  2. Types of Documents:
    • Summary Plan Description (SPD): Provides a comprehensive overview of the plan, including benefits, rights, and obligations of participants.
    • Summary of Material Modifications (SMM): Describes changes to the plan or the SPD.
    • Annual Report (Form 5500): Contains financial information, plan operations, and compliance information.
    • Plan Document: The formal written document that establishes the plan and its terms.
    • Trust Agreement: If applicable, the document that sets up the trust to hold plan assets.
    • Collective Bargaining Agreement: If the plan is subject to one, this document outlines the agreement between the employer and the union.
    • Insurance Contract: For plans funded through insurance, the contract between the plan and the insurer.
  3.   Response Time
    • Plan administrators are required to provide the requested documents within 30 days of receiving the written request.
  4. Civil Penalties:
    • If the plan administrator fails to comply with a request for documents within 30 days, they may be liable for a penalty of up to $110 per day (adjusted periodically for inflation) from the date of the failure to provide the documents.

Contract Law Principles and Strategies

  1. Examine the Plan Language
    • Ambiguities in the Plan Document: Carefully review the ERISA plan documents to identify any ambiguities in the reimbursement or subrogation clauses. Under the doctrine of contra proferentem, ambiguities in the contract are construed against the drafter. If the language is unclear, you may argue that it should be interpreted in favor of your client.
    • Scope and Limits of Reimbursement: Ensure the plan’s reimbursement claim strictly adheres to the terms outlined in the plan document. Some plans may have specific provisions or limitations regarding the scope of their recovery rights.
  2. Make Whole Doctrine
    • Plan Language Examination: Assess whether the plan explicitly disclaims the “make whole” doctrine. If it does not, you can argue that the plan should only be reimbursed if and when your client has been fully compensated (made whole) for all their losses, including pain and suffering, lost wages, and future medical expenses.
    • Equitable Arguments: Use the make whole doctrine to negotiate a reduction in the lien amount, arguing that the plaintiff has not been fully compensated for their total losses.
  3. Common Fund Doctrine
    • Attorney’s Fees and Costs: The common fund doctrine may require the ERISA plan to share in the attorney’s fees and costs incurred in obtaining the settlement. Argue that the plan’s recovery should be reduced proportionally to account for the legal expenses incurred in creating the settlement fund.
    • Explicit Plan Language: Verify if the plan explicitly addresses the common fund doctrine. If the plan does not waive this doctrine, you can argue that it applies.
  4. Analyze the Plan’s Equitable Lien by Agreement
    • Equitable Lien Requirements: For an equitable lien by agreement to be enforceable, the plan must identify a specific fund (the settlement) and assert a right to a portion of that fund. Ensure the lien is tied to the settlement and not your client’s general assets.
    • Constructive Trust: ERISA plans often seek a constructive trust on settlement funds. Argue that the plan’s right to recovery should be limited to specific funds clearly identified in the settlement agreement.
  5. Proportional Allocation of Damages
    • Detailed Settlement Allocation: Structure the settlement to allocate specific amounts to various categories of damages, such as medical expenses, pain and suffering, and lost wages. Argue that the ERISA lien should only apply to the portion allocated to medical expenses.
    • Court Approval: Seek court approval of the settlement allocation to strengthen the argument against the ERISA lien’s applicability to non-medical portions of the settlement.
  6. Equitable Relief
    • Equitable Defenses: Use equitable defenses such as unjust enrichment, undue hardship, or the unclean hands doctrine to argue that full reimbursement would be inequitable under the circumstances, if applicable.
  7. Negotiation and Settlement
    • Negotiation Tactics: Engage in negotiations with the ERISA plan administrator, insurance carrier, subrogation vendor, etc., presenting all legal and equitable arguments to seek a reduction in the lien amount.

Conclusion

Combating an ERISA lien on a personal injury settlement requires a thorough understanding of both the specific plan language and applicable contract law principles. By carefully analyzing the plan documents, leveraging doctrines like make whole and common fund, and employing strategic negotiation tactics, personal injury attorneys can often reduce the impact of these liens on their clients’ recoveries. Effective use of these strategies not only maximizes the client’s net recovery but also ensures compliance with legal and ethical standards.

While a personal injury attorney may be able to resolve a lien on their own, it is more efficient and advantageous to engage Synergy for this specialized task. This allows attorneys to focus on other revenue generating cases, knowing that a team of lien experts are diligently working to achieve the best possible result for their client. Synergy’s expertise and hundreds of years of combined experience in handling ERISA liens ensure that the settlement process are preserved as much as possible, leading to optimal outcomes for the client.

Synergy is your lien resolution partner for all health insurance liens – ERISA, FEHBA, Military, Medicaid, Med Pay, Medicare, Hospital, Private and more.  Partner with Synergy today to see what a difference it makes for the efficiency and profitability of your firm. 

Written by: Teresa Kenyon | Vice President of Lien Resolution Services

When Is Medicare At Fault

Guest blog

When you visit a doctor, you expect a certain level of care. This comes from both the doctor and your health care coverage provider such as Medicare. Unfortunately, patients do not always receive the care they deserve, but when this happens, who is at fault? Is it the doctor’s office, or is it Medicare?

In some cases, one or the other fails to serve their patients properly. Sometimes it can even be both parties. As a medical malpractice lawyer can share, there are certain cases where it is difficult to determine fault, but a knowledgeable attorney can guide you through the process in order to get you the compensation you deserve.

A lawyer will examine all parties involved in your case, and they will be able to determine who was the at-fault party. Our friends at Cohen & Cohen are here to shed some light on examples of issues you might face from doctors versus Medicare so that you can be well-informed and prepared in case these incidents happen to you.

Discrimination

No kind of discrimination is tolerated within Medicare. This includes sex, gender, race, and more. At any time, if you believe this is what is happening to you, it is best to contact a lawyer for help. However, when it comes to discrimination it is most times at the level of your actual care provider and not your coverage provider. This means the doctors treating you are more likely to be at fault than Medicare. There are rare instances, however, where discrimination can occur within the Medicare system.

Privacy

You have a right for your medical records to be kept private unless you designate that they may be shared with another party. There might be a time when your records are shared without your consent. If your records are shared, this is a legal violation. It is Medicare’s duty to ensure the businesses they work with protect your information. If Medicare is found to have been negligent in this aspect, you may have a case. Oftentimes it is the actual doctor’s office that is at fault because they are the ones physically sharing the information, but if Medicare knew that a doctor had been sharing information and did nothing about it, this is where fault becomes tricky to establish.

Questions

A large part of Medicare is that you have the right to have your questions about the services rendered by Medicare answered. After all, if you do not know what is covered, then you may find yourself with a large hospital bill you were not planning on having. This scenario is extremely rare, but it can happen — and if you are directly asking the questions to Medicare and notice they are not answering you, then it is time to seek legal help. 


In essence, you have a right to be treated fairly, have your privacy protected, and have all of your questions answered. These are a few of the basic premises upon which Medicare operates. If any of these are violated, it is time to seek an attorney. Even if you are not sure whether your issues stem from Medicare or your doctor, it is best to seek legal counsel to understand what your options are. Contact a lawyer near you today for more information.

Medicare Compliance: Reducing MSP Liability for your PI Firm

By Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., MSCC

When representing a Medicare beneficiary, personal injury law firms should prioritize compliance with the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSP). Inadequate compliance processes can lead to severe consequences, including government actions against the firm. This blog post outlines the risks and best practices related to MSP compliance to safeguard both your firm and your clients.

Government Actions for Non-Compliance

The government’s enforcement of the MSPA is evident in several cases where personal injury law firms faced significant monetary liability for non-compliance:

Harrisburg, August 2020: A law firm paid $53,295 to resolve liability for non-repayment of Medicare conditional payments in a malpractice case against a pharmacy.

Philadelphia, January 2020: Another firm settled allegations of failure to reimburse Medicare by agreeing to pay $6,604.59, implementing compliance practices, and acknowledging potential liability under the False Claims Act.

Baltimore, November 2019: A law firm paid $91,406.98 to resolve allegations of failure to pay back Medicare, emphasizing that joint representation and referral cases must also comply.  You can’t refer a case and be absolved of liability. 

Maryland, March 2019: A firm settled for $250,000 due to reliance on an incorrect conditional payment letter rather than a final demand from Medicare.

Philadelphia, June 2018: A firm settled for $28k and agreed to initiate a compliance program as part of a settlement which was according to the US Attorney meant to remind attorneys of their obligation to reimburse Medicare.

These cases underscore the government’s commitment to bringing legal actions to recover Medicare dollars from personal injury law firms and holding attorneys accountable for non-compliance, regardless of the circumstances.

Best Practices for MSP Compliance

To navigate the complex regulatory landscape, personal injury law firms can adopt best practices for Medicare compliance. Firms should:

  • Identify Medicare Beneficiaries: Establish processes to determine if clients are Medicare beneficiaries early in the representation.
  • Understand Reporting Requirements: Make sure to appropriately report representation to Medicare and be aware of the medical information and ICD codes reported by defendant insurers under the Mandatory Insurer Reporting law (MIR) created by MMSEA.
  • Appropriate Release Language: Avoid agreeing to inaccurate or onerous Medicare compliance language in settlement documents prepared by the other side.
  • Resolve Conditional Payments: Ensure timely reporting and resolution of conditional payment obligations to avoid personal liability.
  • Utilize Compromise and Waiver Processes: Implement procedures to reclaim funds from Medicare when appropriate.
  • Educate Clients: Inform clients about Medicare compliance issues, especially regarding potential denial of future injury-related services.
  • Monitor Liens: Be vigilant about identifying and addressing all Medicare liens, including those from Medicare Part C lien holders.

Implementing a Compliance Strategy

Client education for those who are Medicare eligible is the cornerstone of a successful Medicare compliance strategy for law firms. Lawyers and their staff must be well-informed about MSP-related issues to identify potential problems before they escalate into malpractice claims or personal liability. Outsourcing to a strategic partner who has deep expertise in the Medicare Secondary Payer Act should also be considered.  Developing a systematic approach to handle Medicare beneficiaries and related compliance concerns is essential for protecting both clients and the firm’s integrity.

Conclusion

The government’s enforcement of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act highlights the necessity for personal injury law firms to ensure MSP compliance thoroughly. Non-compliance can result in significant monetary consequences, personal liability, and damage to the firm’s reputation. By adopting best practices and ensuring thorough firm-wide processes, law firms can navigate the complexities of Medicare compliance, safeguarding their practice and serving their clients effectively.

Turn to Synergy for experts who can help create a Medicare compliance strategy for your firm to mitigate liability risks and protect clients.  Inadequate compliance processes can result in financial liabilities and worse yet damage to your firm’s reputation.  Ensure your Medicare processes protect both your clients and your practice by partnering with Synergy for total Medicare compliance.