What is workers’ compensation fraud?
Worker’s compensation fraud is when a person dishonestly obtains a payment or other benefit under the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) (the Act).
Worker fraud includes:
- Claiming for an injury that did not occur, or happened outside of work;
- Exaggerating an injury;
- Earning a wage while on income maintenance and not declaring it;
- Receiving Centrelink payments while on income maintenance and not declaring them;
- Altering medical certificates; or
- Providing false or misleading information in relation to a claim for compensation.
Employees found guilty of workers compensation fraud can be liable for criminal convictions, fines up to $55,000 or a maximum of five years imprisonment. They can also be ordered to pay back any money obtained dishonestly and costs incurred by WorkCover Qld to investigate and prosecute the matter.
What should an employer look out for?
Any of the following occurrences may be an indication of a fraudulent claim and serves as a warning to the employer to follow the claim closely:
- Did the employee report the incident immediately or was there a delay?
- When did the injury occur? If it happened on a Monday, the alleged injury could have occurred on the weekend.
- Can the employee remember the exact details of their injury?
- Has the employee changed their story as the claim progresses?
- Are there inconsistencies in the employee’s story about the accident?
- Has the employee developed new secondary conditions?
- Did the injury occur immediately before retirement?
- Did the employee suffer severe injuries from a minor accident?
- Were there any witnesses when the injury occurred?
- Did the injury result from reasonable management action taken in a reasonable way to manage the employee’s performance?
- Is the employee having financial hardships at home?
- Does the employee have more than one active claim?
- Does the employee have previously rejected claims?
- Does the injury relate to a pre-existing condition?
- Has the employee changed their treating medical practitioner?
- Is the employer having difficulty communicating with the employee out of work and at home?
- Is the employee missing medical appointments?
- Has the employer received reports the employee is doing strenuous work at home?
If an employer suspects an employee has lodged a workers’ compensation claim that should not be accepted they should contact WorkCover Qld immediately to get advice on the best way to handle the claim. If possible, the employer should submit a comprehensive response while the claim is being initially assessed and before it is determined.
Legislation
Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld)
Further information
If you need any assistance drafting your response to WorkCover or conducting a workplace investigation, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Disclaimer
This article contains general commentary only. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
Related insights about employment law for employers
-
Employers now required to provide paid domestic violence leave
The Federal Government has proposed a bill that provides eligible employees with paid family and domestic violence leave. Find out more about the proposed changes and how they could affect your business.
-
Ex-employees and intellectual property protection
Ex-employees can be a threat to a company’s intellectual property, but with the right contractual clauses, employers can protect their trademarks, copyright, patent, and design. Learn more about how to safeguard your company’s intellectual property.
-
Cost awards in unfair dismissal cases – part 4
This article examines the rare but possible situation in which an employee could be liable to pay the employer’s costs in an Application under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Find out more about this situation and the case of Ewan Chapman v Ignis Labs Pty Ltd t/a Ignis Labs [2021] FWCFB 932.
-
Cost awards in unfair dismissal cases – part 3
This article looks at when costs orders can be imposed on a party to an unfair dismissal application, with an example of how costs orders can be imposed on a complainant employee.
-
Cost awards in unfair dismissal cases – part 2
The case of Clair Petersen v Kizuri Capital Pty Ltd, Maycorp Pty Ltd and Cricklewood Capital Pty Ltd T/A Allpet Products [2021] FWC 526 highlights the importance of parties engaging meaningfully and reasonably throughout the unfair dismissal process. A costs order was made against an employer who ignored settlement offers, demonstrating that such behaviour can…
-
Changes for casual employment – employer’s responsibilites
The Fair Work Amendment Act 2021 (Cth) has changed the landscape of employment for casual employees. Employers need to be aware of the amended definition of casual employees, the “casual conversion” option and the requirement to provide a Casual Employment Information Statement (CEIS).
