LC 5811-timeliness of petition (California)

This category is meant for discussion of technical legal issues in workers' compensation. If you are an injured worker, do not ask questions here. Go to the Injured Workers' forum.

LC 5811-timeliness of petition (California)

Postby wcscout on Fri Sep 28, 2018 9:22 am

Does anything govern statute of limitations on seeking reimbursement via a 5811 Petition, received an interpreting petition 5 years from DOS. For that matter is there anything governing similar costs issues, even 5710 petitions?
wcscout
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:52 pm

Re: LC 5811-timeliness of petition (California)

Postby LawAdvocate on Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:34 pm

This is from mytwocents on the thread that was about Interpreter liens if you go back, on the board. Since he explained it so well - full credit to him/her -

Mytwocents wrote:

"Can’t blame you for being confused. However, there is a logical explanation for this.

SB 863 removed medical-legal costs from Labor Code section 4903(b) effective 1/1/13. At that point, there was no way to get ML disputes before the WCAB. So, in the fall of 2013, the Board adopted Rule 10451.1 for this purpose. The regulation specifically says that the provider can file a petition and a lien is not required. Subsequently, the Legislature must have had second thoughts because as of 1/1/15, ML expenses were added back into 4903(b) and the original pre-2013 language was restored. The 2015 amendment also made ML costs subject to the lien statute of limitations in section 4903.5 which only applies to “4903(b) liens.”

So, here’s how it works. For dates of service in 2013 and 2014, the interpreter you spoke with is correct. There is no requirement to file a lien and thus no SOL for ML interpreters (or any other type of ML expense). For services in 2015 and later, ML providers can still file a petition to get their dispute before the WCAB and don’t have to wait until the case in chief is resolved. However, if the ML dispute remains unresolved more than 18 months after the last date of service, they have to file a lien or be barred by the lien SOL.

Rule 10451.1 predated the 2015 restoration of ML expenses as liens, but there is no conflict with the Labor Code because if a ML provider files its petition and gets the dispute resolved within 18 months of the last date of service, it will be able to avoid the lien filing fee. There is a prevailing myth that ML providers never have to file liens and that there is no SOL ever which is not true. Your interpreter informant may have blown the SOL on a lot of cases."
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: LC 5811-timeliness of petition (California)

Postby LawAdvocate on Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:36 pm

The full thread where this was discussed containing mytwocents answer is here:

viewtopic.php?f=70&t=3469
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am


Return to Legal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests