Disability Law Show: Alberta & BC – S1 E20

Episode Summary

Can disability benefits be cut off due to surveillance? Disability lawyer Sivan Tumarkin at Samfiru Tumarkin LLP answers this question and more on the Disability Law Show on 980 CKNW in Vancouver, 770 CHQR in Calgary and 630 CHED in Edmonton.

Listen below to discover important information about your rights and a guide through the proper steps to take when your insurance provider cuts off your long-term disability or denies your insurance claim.

Whether you need a BC disability lawyer or disability lawyers in Alberta, Sivan and his team can get you the advice you need, and the compensation you deserve.

Listen to the Episode

Show Notes

• An employer can no longer accommodate a return to work plan: In many cases, there is an overlap between disability claims and employment issues. Employers are obligated to accommodate an employee’s medical condition and ongoing disability. A refusal to do so is considered a human rights violation. It is important to speak to a law firm that is well versed in both disability and employment law. In cases in which a workplace initially triggered a mental health condition, insurance companies try and argue that the condition is situational and not generalized.
• Benefits being cut off due to surveillance after several years: After two years on long-term disability, the test in order to qualify for benefits changes from a disability in a claimant’s own occupation to any occupation. Insurance companies often conduct surveillance on claimants however it rarely amounts to much in regards to the claim. Insurance companies often use surveillance out of context in order to justify ending LTD benefits. Claimants who have had their disability benefits cut off as a result of surveillance should speak to a disability lawyer to determine their next steps.
• Failure to file a claim for long-term disability benefits in time: Insurance companies can deny benefits on a technicality; such as a missed deadline. There is, however, case law in which judges have questioned insurance companies on the actual consequences of a late deadline. Insurance companies that deny claims on the basis of paperwork that has been filed late are aware of how the courts have handled similar claims.