Anyone ever have a Father's Rights Activist as a CS worker?

[Sunshine1]

Maybe it is just me, but everytime I submit a DOLLAR for unreimbursed Medical expenses, my CS worker finds some reason, any reason, to spit it back out at me!

I am getting really irritated.  I follow the rules she quoted me one day and then she changes them.  Then I submit an exact same expense from a previous month and then it is challenged....WTF?

To quote her last letter to me she says..."I can not tell you what you can and can't claim, but just note that EX does have the right to dispute this and this would mean going back into court."

What does that mean?  Stop sending in these claims or your going to go to court?  She OBVIOUSLY  has never spoken to my ex because that is one place I am definitely not afraid of.  Its the only time I actually get to discuss anything calmly without the SM's input.

Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill?  She even went as far as saying that 1200.00 in unreimbursed AND state payback (son is MA for life due to disability), if challenged by my EX I would not get the tax deduction because she considered him "caught up".  WHAT?!?!@?

I am sorry if it says NEGATIVE $1200.00  anywhere in America, ie your bank account, the IRS, if your bloody checkbook says MINUS 1200.00, that means you are empty, nada, you owe 1200.00!

Ok got that off my chest, any ideas on if she is just a nice CS worker or am I just imagining she is really, letting him get away with things that he shouldn't and I should request a new worker?

[FLMom]

I have no clue how the CS system works there, but my theory in dealing with difficult entities is to go two heads above.

Whether it's the cable company, phone company, customer complaint at a store, etc, after I feel like I'm making no headway with someone, I throw up my hands. You've got more patience dealing with this cookie than I would. Usually when you report something to someone's immediate supervisor it's someone they work with on a regular basis, and you get the eye roll and nudge between the two of them. However, if you move one step higher on whatever ladder you're dealing with, that person is usually not in "cahoots" with the underlings.

Hubby and I are both working for corporate America, and we've both agreed on many occasions that this cuts out a majority of the BS.

Good Luck,
FMom

[Jade]

>Maybe it is just me, but everytime I submit a DOLLAR for
>unreimbursed Medical expenses, my CS worker finds some reason,
>any reason, to spit it back out at me!
>
>I am getting really irritated.  I follow the rules she quoted
>me one day and then she changes them.  Then I submit an exact
>same expense from a previous month and then it is
>challenged....WTF?
>
>To quote her last letter to me she says..."I can not tell you
>what you can and can't claim, but just note that EX does have
>the right to dispute this and this would mean going back into
>court."
>
>What does that mean?  Stop sending in these claims or your
>going to go to court?  She OBVIOUSLY  has never spoken to my
>ex because that is one place I am definitely not afraid of.
>Its the only time I actually get to discuss anything calmly
>without the SM's input.
>
>Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill?  She even went as
>far as saying that 1200.00 in unreimbursed AND state payback
>(son is MA for life due to disability), if challenged by my EX
>I would not get the tax deduction because she considered him
>"caught up".  WHAT?!?!@?
>
>I am sorry if it says NEGATIVE $1200.00  anywhere in America,
>ie your bank account, the IRS, if your bloody checkbook says
>MINUS 1200.00, that means you are empty, nada, you owe
>1200.00!
>
>Ok got that off my chest, any ideas on if she is just a nice
>CS worker or am I just imagining she is really, letting him
>get away with things that he shouldn't and I should request a
>new worker?


If I were you, I would file a complaint against that CS worker stating an obvious bias.  Nothing may come of it, but if she does this to enough people and enough people complain, it is a big red flag to her boss.  I would also request a different worker.  

Keep meticulous records of the medical expenses.  Even the ones she spits back at you.  Just because she considers him caught up, doesn't mean that a court will agree with her.  And keep resubmitting the expenses, simply stating that the only way you will not get reimbursed for a medical expense as per the court order (which she is obligated to follow, she doesn't get to put her own spin on it) is if a JUDGE says you don't get reimbursed.  Every time you talk to her about medical expenses, bring up the words "court ordered".  If she says anything about it, just tell her that she obviously needs a reminder that she is not the judge in the case and can't change the court order based on her personal beliefs.

[mistoffolees]

One rule of thumb: "never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence".

I obviously only have access to the information here, but I don't see anything that's openly hostile. I see perhaps a caseworker who's overworked and doesn't check things properly, who jumps to conclusions, and doesn't take time to explain things well (or perhaps doesn't understand them).

If you hollar 'bias', you're not likely to get a new case worker. You ARE likely to get a caseworker who hates you and WILL be taking the other side in the future.

Of course, she may really be biased, but sometimes you need to play the hand you're dealt. Document everything and you may have to resubmit things a couple of times. That's likely to be less trouble than you'll have if the caseworker really gets after you.

[Jade]

>One rule of thumb: "never attribute to malice what can be
>attributed to incompetence".
>
>I obviously only have access to the information here, but I
>don't see anything that's openly hostile. I see perhaps a
>caseworker who's overworked and doesn't check things properly,
>who jumps to conclusions, and doesn't take time to explain
>things well (or perhaps doesn't understand them).
>
>If you hollar 'bias', you're not likely to get a new case
>worker. You ARE likely to get a caseworker who hates you and
>WILL be taking the other side in the future.
>
>Of course, she may really be biased, but sometimes you need to
>play the hand you're dealt. Document everything and you may
>have to resubmit things a couple of times. That's likely to be
>less trouble than you'll have if the caseworker really gets
>after you.

If enough people complain about the same employee for the same reason, that will raise a red flag about said employee.  Keeping quiet will not change or improve the situation.  

And from what was posted, there most definitely is a bias.  The caseworker has no right to kick back submitted medical expenses.  The only person who has the right to dispute them is the person being asked to pay them.  

[mistoffolees]

I think you're jumping to conclusions without all the facts.

There may be a particular procedure which needs to be followed for the expenses to be reimbursed - particularly since the state is apparently involved (as it is in this case). Be careful reaching a conclusion based on one side of the story.

As for the rest, you're right - people need to speak up to change problems. But the OP needs to realize that she may pay a very dear price for doing so.

[Sunshine1]

She goes through and says...#2, nooo, that is not a reimbursable expense.  #3, why didn't you submit that through EX's insurance (which I just won contempt because I had no cards to actually SUBMIT anything to)  #4, that is surely questionable, a medical conference for the child?  

HUH?  She actually DOES decide.

I have a question...if you are at a medical conference, with your medically challenged child and during your day trip out, you go to a zoo, and you rent a stroller for 10.00, because your medically challenged child would never be able to make that trek.  Would you consider that a medical necesity?  He is unable to walk long distances. (Would have never went if they hadn't had a gigantic stroller for a 60lb child)

Would that be considered?  Knowing what I know about my child and if the tables were turned I would consider that a necessity...but what are some of your opinions.

BTW, she kicks them back BEFORE, EX ever gets to see them to dispute them.

[Jade]

>She goes through and says...#2, nooo, that is not a
>reimbursable expense.  #3, why didn't you submit that through
>EX's insurance (which I just won contempt because I had no
>cards to actually SUBMIT anything to)  #4, that is surely
>questionable, a medical conference for the child?  
>
>HUH?  She actually DOES decide.
>
>I have a question...if you are at a medical conference, with
>your medically challenged child and during your day trip out,
>you go to a zoo, and you rent a stroller for 10.00, because
>your medically challenged child would never be able to make
>that trek.  Would you consider that a medical necesity?  He is
>unable to walk long distances. (Would have never went if they
>hadn't had a gigantic stroller for a 60lb child)
>
>Would that be considered?  Knowing what I know about my child
>and if the tables were turned I would consider that a
>necessity...but what are some of your opinions.
>
>BTW, she kicks them back BEFORE, EX ever gets to see them to
>dispute them.

If you can get a doctor to write that the stroller is medically necessary, then you can submit it for reimbursement.  Personally, that is a battle I wouldn't pick.  

I would go for the travel costs associated with any medical treatment and medical expenses that the insurance doesn't cover.  

And I would ask for a new worker.  And if she kicks it back to you, go to her supervisor and complain.  And if that doesn't work, go to that person's supervisor.  

She is acting in a an unethical and unprofessional manner.  She doesn't get to determine what the judge meant.  If the ex has a problem with a submitted bill, then he has to appeal it with the judge.

[4honor]

the stroller was NOT medically necessary because the trip to the zoo was not medically necessary. Now if the stroller was needed to take the child between medical appointments, or the child's doctor has prescribed a motorized scooter or wheel chair (whether for all the time or for part of the time due to the child's stamina) then I would say, maybe.

"Medically necessary" is defined many ways, and is subject to various interpretations in most courts of law. That will screw you up with any CS worker. A court order with this verbage is volatile because there is no "meeting of the minds" as to the intent. (e.g., I think medication for ADHD is NOT medically necesary without ruling out other factors FIRST and would fight charges to medicate my child for it without such testing... but you might feel that medication at any stage is fine because it is prescribed by a duly authorized physician.)

You should be able to get proportional reimbursement for anything that is necessary for life or limb, emergencey care, and most medications which are doctor prescribed. Anything outside of that COULD be fought in court, but not always is worth it.

Sunshine, I have been around here for a long time and I just say it like I find it. On the stroller issue, I doubt you could win... because it was used at the zoo... and was a one day rental. If the rental was for a long term proposition, you might prevail.

On the other stuff, #3 and #4, you should have a discussion with the case worker's superior, and go up the ranks until you get satisfaction, or they can quote you the regulation where they are allowed to pick and choose what to forward for payment and what not to forward.

Never be nasty about it, just keep asking "why not" until they answer you or get someone to do what they ought to be doing all along.

[sdbleve]

First of, let me state that I agree. The case worker should not be the first step in determining what is a valid expense or what is not. That first step should be the parent that is being asked to pony up for the expense. If the other parent has not problem with sharing in the expense then there is not an issue. If the other parent does have a problem...then the case worker should become involved.

Secondly, I dont know your situation. But would like to share what came to mind when I was reading your posts. Was there a medical necessity to take your child to the "conference". Was there a medical or thereputic (sp) benefit from the child being there? If it were necessary, did the other parent also attend? And if not, why? Are you asking for reimbursement for the entire trip, or just half of what it cost to take your child. If the other parent went to a conference (with or with out the child) would you be willing to pay?

Also was the trip to the zoo medically necessary? If not, it was a pleasure trip for you and your child. Do you ask the other parent for reimbursement for going to the zoo in your own home town? You decided to make that trip and should incure all expenses associated with it.