Washington Court Finds Omaha Wrongfully Relied on Video Surveillance to Deny Disability Benefits
The court discounted the video surveillance, finding “The video surveillance footage was of marginal, if any, relevance.” The court continued, “The surveillance video of Ms. Young does not depict activity inconsistent with her reported limitations. The video does not demonstrate Ms. Young has the ability to work full-time in her regular occupation.” The court ordered that the plaintiff was entitled to long term disability benefits due to her inability to perform her regular occupation and ordered the parties to come to an agreement as to the amount of damages.
Claim for Disability Benefits, Video Surveillance and Administrative Review
The plaintiff left her job as a Database Systems Engineer at Spokane’s Teacher’s Credit Union due to frequent headaches, neck and shoulder pain. Although her pain may have been caused by cervical spine degeneration, her treating physician believed it was exacerbated by her job which required her to spend a lot of time hovering over a computer screen. He expected her disability to last at least 12 months during which time she would be unable “to perform any of her basic work activities.” Omaha ordered an IME by a neurologist. Following the exam, the neurologist agreed with the assessment of the treating physician that the plaintiff was disabled.
Not satisfied with its own medical examiner’s report, Omaha conducted video surveillance of plaintiff over a four-day period of time. The videos showed plaintiff walking her dog, driving to medical appointments and to church. Omaha sent the tapes to its medical examiner with a list of what the Washington federal court considered to be leading questions. The court found the questions to be “reflective of bias and intended to reach a desired conclusion.” The examining physician agreed with Omaha that the videos supported the view that the plaintiff was not disabled. In response, the court expressed some discomfort with the “‘independent’ medical examiner acquiescing to defendant’s advocacy.”
Court Analysis of the Videos
The court found the videos were entirely consistent with activity the plaintiff had claimed she was capable of performing. Walking her dog was consistent with her claim that she walked for exercise six days a week. Nothing in the videos contradicted her claims of pain making it impossible for her to perform the duties of her regular job. The videos were also consistent with the reports of her treating physician and the initial report of the independent medical examiner. The court concluded, “The surveillance video of Ms. Young does not depict activity inconsistent with her reported limitations. The video does not demonstrate Ms. Young has the ability to work full-time in her regular occupation… The plaintiff has established she was disabled under the Policy and unable to perform the material duties of her regular occupation.”
This case was not handled by our office, but it may provide claimants guidance in their pursuit of long term disability benefits and how video surveillance conducted by the insurer can be used by plaintiffs to support their claim. If you need assistance with a similar matter, please contact any of our lawyers for a free consultation.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Submit a Strong Mutual of Omaha Appeal Package
We work with you, your doctors, and other experts to submit a very strong Mutual of Omaha appeal.
Sue Mutual of Omaha
We have filed thousands of disability denial lawsuits in federal Courts nationwide against Mutual of Omaha.
Get Your Mutual of Omaha Disability Application Approved
Prevent a Mutual of Omaha Disability Benefit Denial
Negotiate a Mutual of Omaha Lump-Sum Settlement
Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.
Policy Holder Rating
I do not understand how a “medical review team” who has never laid eyes on my wife can say she is able to return to work when her doctors who see her on a regular basis have documented that she can't
Reply
THEY SCAMMED ME AND DID NOT CARE
This company is awful
I would encourage anyone who has problems with Mutual of Omaha or United of Omaha to immediately contact an attorney.
MOO attempted to strong arms me with collection tactics. Now, they're stalling
MOO stopped my husband's benefits before telling him. They handled his claim terribly
Reply
This company is very corrupt, Be aware
Mutual of Omaha is a rip off.
Q: Can I ask for another appeal?
Q: I'm in jeopardy of losing everything because of MOO. Can you help?
Q: Can MOO deny my claim on the basis of preexisting condition when my condition is not preexisting?
Q: What is my "regular occupation" if I started my own business after resigning from my old job?
Q: Am I able to work part time at a different job that is nothing like the one I was at when I was injured?
Q: Can I get a lump sum check from MOO?
Q: Should I be able to restrict the release of medical records to under 24 months period?
Q: Should I write an appeal letter? What should it include?
What is a "Gainful Occupation" under a Disability Insurance Policy?
Can my insurance carrier deny my benefits even if there is no change in my medical condition?
Why Must Your Disability Insurance Lawyer Understand Your Disabling Condition?
Disability Benefit Denial Reason #5 – Your Medical Evidence is Weak
Disability Benefit Denial Reason #4 - Your Doctor Is Misled By the Disability Company
Disability Benefit Denial Reason #3 - Video & Social Media Surveillance
How Do You Fight a Long-Term Disability Denial?
Disability Denial Reason #2 - Change of Disability Definition & Vocational Review
After appeal filed by Attorney Jay Symonds, Mutual of Omaha overturned previous denial of short term disability benefits for Maine Senior Software Engineer
After an appeal, a former Director of Information Security, gets disability benefits approved for mental health disorder. The fight for long term disability benefits for client’s physical limitations continues
United of Omaha overturns decision to deny benefits to disabled Quality Assurance Manager after Appeal discredits its medical review and vocational assessment
After appeal filed by Attorney Jay Symonds, Mutual of Omaha overturned its previous denial of short term disability benefits for Colorado Senior Manager
Mutual of Omaha Reinstates Benefits of Business Development Manager after Appealing the Termination of Her LTD Benefits
Dell Disability Lawyers Successfully Appeals Denial of Benefits to Quality Control Inspector
Mutual of Omaha Approves Dell Disability Lawyers Client for Short Term Disability Benefits After Administrative Appeal
Mutual Of Omaha Overturns Denial of Short Term Disability Benefits for Software Developer With Chronic Back Pain
Reviews from Our Clients






