M
mustang
Guest
lawrat,
the statue you quoted to elijahsmantle, would that apply in ontario, canada? i know some law is interchangeable with the 2 countries, so i was curious about this? i went to an independant medical and things were ommitted and also an exam by a designated assessment center which had omissions as well as a defense doc. the main one would be the defense doc as he tried to imply that my spinal fusion was not necessary while i told him i was booked at the end of the month. that while i had been on morphine for 2 years it should not be a deciding factor for pain. also he said that my word should not be taken at face value. these are just some examples of things written. he would start a sentence stating something my doc said and added dots[....] where things were spoken in my benefit. they omited pain on exam etc. i was just wondering if this statue would apply to me as you posted to me once when i wrote the whole story some time back and mentioned malpractice in your response as well as bad faith. speaking of bad faith, they still refused my benefits with all the evidence from my surgeon and his legal report acknowledging that this is 100% from the accident. their excuse"the medical documentation does not support that you are substaincially disabled." my physical limitations from surgery is no lifting bending twisting leaning. with those restrictions, i can not do my housework. just wanted to know if this qualifies as bad faith malpractice? thanks.
the statue you quoted to elijahsmantle, would that apply in ontario, canada? i know some law is interchangeable with the 2 countries, so i was curious about this? i went to an independant medical and things were ommitted and also an exam by a designated assessment center which had omissions as well as a defense doc. the main one would be the defense doc as he tried to imply that my spinal fusion was not necessary while i told him i was booked at the end of the month. that while i had been on morphine for 2 years it should not be a deciding factor for pain. also he said that my word should not be taken at face value. these are just some examples of things written. he would start a sentence stating something my doc said and added dots[....] where things were spoken in my benefit. they omited pain on exam etc. i was just wondering if this statue would apply to me as you posted to me once when i wrote the whole story some time back and mentioned malpractice in your response as well as bad faith. speaking of bad faith, they still refused my benefits with all the evidence from my surgeon and his legal report acknowledging that this is 100% from the accident. their excuse"the medical documentation does not support that you are substaincially disabled." my physical limitations from surgery is no lifting bending twisting leaning. with those restrictions, i can not do my housework. just wanted to know if this qualifies as bad faith malpractice? thanks.