Facebook & Twitter - Cheap Surveillance

It is very common for insurance companies to hire a private investigator to videotape our clients going about their daily lives. For example, an investigator will lay out in bushes videotaping a client walking to a mailbox or driving a car to the store. The investigator will often note in the report that the client was walking smoothly and showing no signs of restrictions and limitations. Then, the report and video is sent to the insurance company and adjuster who ordered it (and caused his company to have to pay for this expensive of surveillance). The adjuster will seize on the report and deny the claim because when the client was secretly videotaped, the client (at least in the subjective opinion of the investigator) showed no signs of any disabling conditions. Some courts have found that such reasons for denying the claim are improper. Courts have observed that the comments made in the report are subjective and, further, that the video does not demonstrate anything at all. You can never know how a court will rule on this however.

Insurance companies have not liked incurring this surveillance expense, of course, because then they have less profit. So they have been searching for a cheaper way to deny our client’s claims. Along comes Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, and other social networking resources. Insurance adjusters have found that many clients have public postings on these social network tools, and they will scour them for anything useful to help in denying a claim. For example, a client who claims that traveling every week is too difficult, because of pain and fatigue, may find his claim to be denied when he posts on Facebook that he traveled in a car for six hours to see his favorite college football team play an away game. What is not noted in such postings is the fact that the next day after travel, the client was too tired to do anything else and it may have taken several days to a week to recuperate.

Another client claimed that typing on a keyboard for several hours made her too tired due to her medical condition, and she could not do that week in and week out in  her occupation any longer. However, she had very lengthy postings on Facebook and Myspace as well as a blog which she seemed to maintain every day. When the insurance company found this, of course, the claim was terminated as the client’s credibility was questioned and challenged. What was not obvious from these postings was the fact that the client would actually only use a keyboard for 15 or 20 minutes at a time and she also requested her daughter to assist in most postings.

When a client is pursuing a disability claim, or they have disability benefits being paid, they should keep in mind that social postings should be kept private. There really is no legitimate reason for them to post information publicly for insurance adjusters to view these matters. If the postings cannot be kept amongst close friends, perhaps they should not be posted at all; they should choose another medium of communication with friends. The social networking resources that have become fairly commonplace in a majority of households have turned out to be a cheap surveillance tool, allowing insurance companies to peer into private lives and misinterpret information. 

Some courts have recognized that a person who meets the definition of disability in the policy is not necessarily incapable of any activity. Usually, a disability policy does not require that a client should relegate himself to a dark secluded room everyday in order to prove disability. A disabled person can and should enjoy many activities, but such persons should be very mindful that their actions can be misinterpreted or misconstrued. Be aware!

Visit one of our websites at www.erisacase.com, www.erisacase.org or www.ltdlawyer.net today for more information.