Role of The Appeal Process Before A Disabled Worker Receives Long Term Benefits

The legal system in British Columbia allows for completion of 2 different appeals, if a disabled worker has received a denial letter. In other words, 2 levels of appeal have been included in the process used for acceptance of a policy holder’s request for long term disability benefits.

Features of the process that work to ensure fairness:

Even though all the appeals get handled by ICBC (Insurance Corporation British Columbia), each appeal comes before a different claims’ unit. Consequently, a denial from one unit does not pressure another unit to copy that first decision.

The same process gets used during an analysis of the reasons for accepting or denying any one policy holder’s request. The ICBC ensures equal treatment to all of the vehicle owners that rely on their coverage from the Insurance Corporation. Each such vehicle owner/policy holder must follow the same procedure, after getting injured in an accident.

One feature that raises questions, regarding how fair the entire process really is:

Injury Lawyer in Kelowna knows that someone that has received a denial letter must pursue all levels of the appeals process before exercising their right to consider a possibility. What is that possibility? It is the chance to file a lawsuit against the letter writer, with that letter writer being the insurance company.

In British Columbia, that insurance company is ICBC, which operates with the support of the government. In other words, the Provincial government has created a system that makes it difficult for anyone to sue that government’s Insurance Corporation.

A time issue that might be viewed as an unfair practice:

The time that a disabled worker must spend pursuing the different appeal levels consumes time that could be spent learning a new skill. Instead, that learning experience gets pushed back. It can only take place following completion of all the levels in the appeals process. The mandated procedure contains that requirement, because the demand for completion of all levels in the appeals process reduces the likelihood that someone might sue ICBC.

In addition, no consideration is given to the possibility that a disabled worker might have a skill that he or she developed during pursuit of a hobby or a recreational activity. That skill’s existence would provide the disabled worker with an alternative approach to the problem created by his or her long-term disability.

Instead, the system considers only those skills that relate directly to the disabled worker’s past occupations and past job-related experiences. This approach tends to stifle any effort that might be made to turn a given skill into a money-making opportunity, a thriving and profitable business.