5 Charged in Alleged $100 Million Workers’ Comp Scam

By | April 23, 2007

  • April 23, 2007 at 8:36 am
    Mjolnir says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I\’m anxiously awaiting all the posters who continually attack the insurers over workers comp claims.

    There have been a lot of posts recently about how companies deny claims and people are left destitute.

    So… let\’s hear it.

  • April 23, 2007 at 10:48 am
    Jeff says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    mjolnir,
    I\’m not sure I\’m following what you are saying here. Are you trying to say that maybe work comp claims that have been denied are because the clmt didn\’t have insurance but thought they did? Or are you saying it\’s not just the insurance companies that are contributing to the problem of people losing everything they have trying to pay med bills without coverage?

    I guess I\’m missing your point, could you please clarify for me?

    Thanks.

  • April 23, 2007 at 11:31 am
    Ratemaker says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Every time there is an article on the site about WC premiums rising or fraudulent WC claims, there is a wave of posts about how the WC insurance carriers are corrupt and that the whole system needs to be scrapped. Mjolnir has just predicted the incoming wave of posts…

  • April 23, 2007 at 12:45 pm
    Reagan says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It\’s the insurance companies fault. Especially the one you work for.

  • April 23, 2007 at 1:16 am
    Jeff says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Ratemaker,

    Fair enough, but I guess I just don\’t see how the two relate since one is a carrier denying a claim when coverage is there and the other is an issue with people not having coverage at all.

    It just seems awfully combative to make a statement like this when not only no one has made that kind of comment, and also that one has nothing to do with the other.

  • April 23, 2007 at 1:30 am
    media mogul says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This story is very poorly reported by IJ because it does not specify the mechanisms of fraud and deceit used in this case.

    Employee leasing firms are often Ponzi schemes–assuming huge liabilities/ deductibles/ SIRs, rating plan debits, etc. on group health and workers compensation/employer\’s liability, not to mention for policies that supposedly cover their special liabilities as co-employer, etc. I won\’t have anything to do with them. I\’ve been in meetings in the past with leasing co. financial people and watched them try to deny or otherwise ignore or sweep under the carpet such vital issues as claims development and IBNR–trying to recruit others into lying to proppsective insurers as they lied to their bankers. Unsavory–to say the least.

    If things go ok, they survive and some prosper to become model citizens. Too often they end like this. These people merely seem to have gotten a head start on removing assets from the company–perhaps it was their intention from the start–the facts should come out in prosecution.

    More effective regulation is certainly needed–otherwise this is just another \”success\” story for the \”free\” market. Perhaps some liabilities will be uncovered in litigation that will lead to some recovery for the victims–perhaps some unwise insurers are paying WC claims during the time they (may have) hsd real WC coverage–otherwise, it\’s once again average citizen taxpapyers having to pay up for damage done by yet another set of heroic entrepreneurs, such as those with Enron….bet the local newspaper society columns thought that these people were so great…

    Note to employers: Don\’t use less than stellar and established employee leasing companies in an atemptget around an uninsurable group or bad workers compensation rcord. Man up, or get out.

  • April 23, 2007 at 1:50 am
    Kathy H says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    How do you know it is the ICF? It isn\’t.
    IT IS THE PEO\’S FAULT. They provided Certificates of Insurance. They are the ones who WEEKLY, take monies from a small business, THEY CLAIM TO BE HR PROVIDERS. Contract states: We will pay all of your state, federal taxes. We will also provide you with WC INSURANCE. Now who is lying? They took the payroll each week allright – THEY DIDN\’T FORWARD MONIES TO THE PROPER STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERMENT, THEY DID NOT FORWARD WC PAYMENTS TO THE INSURANCE CARRIER.

    What don\’t you understand? DESTITUTE? I\’ll give you destitute.

    We will be there to testify against the PEO. FBI has called.

    WE ARE DESTITUTE, BANKRUPT, LOSS OF 3 VEHICLES, LOSS OF HOUSE OF 27 YEARS, LOSS OF 3 CHILDREN, SCATTERED, unable tor eturn to work due to brain surgery.

    GIVE ME A BREAK. It is the PEO\’S – not the insurance companies.

  • April 23, 2007 at 1:54 am
    Kathy H says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You are partially right. The insurance carrier denied the claim because the PEO that the small businessman PAID TO THE PEO did not forward the monies to the proper authorities. The insurance companies. That\’s why they denied the claims. They were not paid. The Cura Group put Union American into bankrtupcy for NON-PAY. That\’s it in a nutshell.

  • April 23, 2007 at 2:21 am
    Mjolnir says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I was being sarcastic, and the poster above you has it right.

    I see a large number of posts on this site about how insurance companies screw their insureds, and often times there are wild claims about how people are being bankrupted and forced to live in pain.

    I\’m not denying it happens, I\’m just tired of hearing anecdotal stories about it.

    I\’m tired of it because there is very little comment when stories about the flipside show up.

    The posters here generally ignore the stories about agent fraud and insurance scams, and that bugs me.

    It\’s very easy to attack a large company and say \”gimmee mah monies\”, but when there is a lack of balancing posts about how unethical it is to cheat the companies I begin to question the motives and facts of the \”predominant\” viewpoint.

    I wasn\’t predicting a wave od posts, merely pointing out the one-sided nature of some of the posting here.

  • April 23, 2007 at 2:28 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Mjolnir-

    I understood your post and the sad reality of it as well.

    It is funny how people never seem to post when the shoe is on the other foot, huh? I guess it is more fun to have something to complain about or stir up controversy over…

    I seriously think some people aren\’t happy unless they are complaining… I am sure you know people of that nature.

    P.S. I predicted the same thing on another post (about the State Farm e-mails) and I think there are about 150 or more replies now…

  • April 24, 2007 at 8:17 am
    Mjolnir says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0


    I want to apologize to those of you who have been forced to read my posts.

    Clearly, my bitter attempts at humor have failed.

    I know that you have limited time to surf the innernetz, and I shouldn\’t be cluttering your browsing time with crap.

    I\’m going to have to stick with punctualization, capitalization, and spelling in order to make my points and let others handle the humor.

    Sorry.

    I\’ll try to stick to my strong points in the future.

  • April 24, 2007 at 8:24 am
    Jewel says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Don\’t you know humor is not allowed here?

    We all need to be as boring and dull as Wondering.

    I was going to post a comment earlier…

    I will post it now instead. Wondering posted their *opinion* which of course, is fine. It is not, however, law.

    You keep on posting your funny comments. If people don\’t like it, they can stop reading your posts, make comments like Wondering did… or write to their Governor.

    P.S. I am not sure that was your best work, but I still appreciated the humor in your post. ;)

  • April 24, 2007 at 4:19 am
    Mary B. says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Mjolnir – you are always amusing and please do not stop because of one insignificant tick does not like want you post. The wondering poster was probably offended because it looked like her everyday writing.

  • April 24, 2007 at 6:35 am
    Wondering says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    if you are trying to be amusing you are not

  • April 30, 2007 at 1:51 am
    happy in missouri says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    In defense of PEOs, we are a 30 year old agency that went to employee leasing 3 years ago and could not be happier with the result. Because we are small, our group health/dental benefit costs were eating us alive. By becoming a part of this much larger group, we were able to reduce our costs significatly and increase the level of benefits greatly. In addition all payroll is off premises, we have recruiting assistance, and a W.C. policy in our own name for which we pay the POE. Thre are good POEs out there that know how to operate correctly and legally and that can add greatly to your bottom line. Check out the firm, the owners, and if in doubt get verification from the carriers. Due dillgence os your responsibility.

  • April 30, 2007 at 6:05 am
    Mary Spears says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I need information on Cura, Cura Group, Certified Services, american Staff Resources; I was hurt on June 30,2003 in TX and was told there was no work comp coverage and I am having trouble finding out who their liability insurance carrier was. can anyone give me any useful information? I need help. I am in the Dallas, TX area. ladyredjax4453@aol.com



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*