The University Gets disability Consortium (UDC) insurance companies employed to make independent medical applications. You advertise that their service will most likely "denial of - closure improved and prices at a lower cost."

Translated: "If you hire us, we claim to save you money denied."

And they do it in a variety of ways. The Velikanov vs. Union security insurance use UDC's Dr. Brian Mercer the "close enough"-method. As in treating a condition that the applicants have not, but hey, who wrote it about and the condition of the plaintiff had (two different types of cysts) were "close enough", that she emission be has determined by anyone without a medical degree. Either he is not his job right (misinterpretation files) or he IS this job be right (refuse to search for ways to the legitimate claims).

The judge threw basically because he found "naturally set Dr. Mercer reviews." I have the feeling that the term that most if not all insurance docs could be applied, but now it seems their pseudo-medical opinions or generally accepted in the courtroom. Read Union on Velikanov vs. Security and see how UDC gescholten calls.

One comment to "judge attacks University disability Consortium advertising and policies"

Message:

Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.

For security purposes, you give the graphic text in the box below: [press F5 if you can't read the text]

View the original article here