In late 2016, prosecutors indicted 21 people in a Dallas area healthcare fraud scheme involving illegal bribes and kickbacks. Authorities say that several physicians and hospital administrators cooked up an elaborate scheme to bilk tens of millions from insurance companies. Since the indictments were announced, several have pleaded guilty.

This week, the kingpin of the scheme, Alan Beauchamp, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Pay and Receive Health Care Bribes and Kickbacks and Aiding and Abetting Commercial Bribery. He faces 10 years in prison when sentenced later this year.

The others indicted are:

• Richard Toussaint, Jr., 58, of Dallas.
• Wade Barker, 51, of Dallas.
• Wilton Burt, 61, of Costa Rica.
• Andrea Kay Smith, 37, of Rockwall.
• Carli Hempel, 40, of Plano.
• Kelly Loter, 48, of Dallas.
• Jackson Jacob, 53, of Murphy.
• Douglas Sung Won, 45, of Dallas.
• Michael Rimlawi, 45, of Dallas.
• David Daesung Kim, 54, of Southlake.
• William Nicholson IV, 46, of Dallas.
• Shawn Henry, 46, of Fort Worth.
• Mrugeshkumar Kumar Shah, 42, of Garland.
• Gerald Foox, 69, of Tyler.
• Frank Gonzales Jr., 41, of Midland.
• Israel Ortiz, 49, of Dallas.
• Iris Forrest, 56, of Dallas.
• Andrew Hillman, 40, of Dallas.
• Semyon Narosov, 51, of Dallas.
• Royce Bicklein, 44, of San Antonio.

Beauchamp resides in Dallas. He is 66.

According to court records, Forest Park Medical Center Dallas was the center of the scheme. Most of the people indicted were either physicians affiliated with the hospital or hospital administrators. One of the defendants, Royce Bicklein, was a worker’s compensation attorney accused of taking bribes and kickbacks in exchange for referring patients to the hospital.

Prosecutors say that hospital opened its doors in 2009. Owned by physicians, the original founders of the hospital were Alan Beauchamp, Dr. Richard Toussaint, Jr., Dr. Wade Barker and Wilton Burt. All were named in the indictment. Beauchamp was Forest Park’s Chief Operating Officer.

Forest Park acted as an out-of-network hospital. It accepted no Medicare or Medicaid patients and set its own rates. The concept was to cater to high end patients with private insurance.

Because the patient co-pays are usually much higher at private out-of-network hospitals, these facilities often struggle to keep their beds full. Forest Park Medical Center Dallas was no exception. According to the indictment, the defendants “engaged in a massive, multi-faceted bribe and kickback scheme.” The kickback payments were paid to incentivize doctors, clinics and even lawyers to steer patients to the hospital.

According to prosecutors, doctors and others who referred patients could expect a kickback of approximately 10% of what the hospital collected for the procedure. The more expensive the procedure, the higher the kickback.

One spinal surgeon, Dr. Douglas Sung Won, allegedly received $7 million in kickbacks. A bariatric surgeon, David Daesung Kim, received almost $5 million.

Several dozen physicians and medical practices were on the receiving end of Forest Park’s gravy train. Some received as little as $500 per month while others received millions in kickbacks.

If a physician didn’t deliver enough patients, they were often contacted by Beauchamp. The indictment documents an email to a chiropractor in which Beauchamp says, “It appears your projections of cases have fallen whole-fully [sic] short… I want to sit down as soon after the beginning of the year and before the 15^th to find out why my $150k investment has not produced Jack.”

The kickbacks became so widespread that prosecutors claim that some of the defendants were even bribing patients to seek treatment at Forest Park. As an inducement to get patients to travel to Dallas, some defendants paid travel and hotel expenses of out-of-town patients or gave them gift cards.

A clinic owner that referred patients to the Forest Park, Israel Ortiz, has already pleaded guilty to federal conspiracy to pay health care kickbacks. According to the Dallas Morning News, Ortiz claims that if he did not make enough referrals Beauchamp would yell and want “more bodies on the table.”

Forest Park Indictments Unsealed December 2016

In late 2016, the court unsealed the indictments against all 21 defendants.

In announcing the charges, Dallas’ U.S. Attorney John Parker said, “Medical providers who enrich themselves through bribes and kickbacks are not only perverting our critical health care system, but they are committing a serious crime. Massive, multi-faceted schemes such as this one, built on illegal financial relationships, drive up the cost of health care for everyone and must be stopped.”

Several of the defendants have now pleaded guilty. The trial for the remaining ones is set for October 22^nd. Now that Beauchamp has pleaded guilty we expect additional defendants will seek last minute deals to avoid trial.

According to a plea agreement filed with the court on July 23^rd, Beauchamp admitted many the allegations of the indictment. He also agreed to cooperate and testify against the holdouts.

One Forest Park Doc Flees to Panama

All of the doctors and other defendants were released on bail. The only one detained was Dr. Gerald Foox, an orthopedist.

The FBI claims Dr. Foox was vacationing in Canada at the time the indictment was unsealed. He promised to surrender at a U.S. border crossing on December 2^nd. Instead, agents say he bordered a flight bound for Panama. Fortunately, an international travel alert was enough to catch Foox as entered Panama. He was immediately deported and arrested by U.S. authorities when he re-entered the United States.

A federal magistrate judge determined Foox was a flight risk. He was detained without bail. Later, however, the court reconsidered and released him on a $13 million bail and a requirement of house arrest.

Immediately after the reconsideration, the United States moved to revoke his bail. They say that prior to fleeing to Panama, Foox withdrew $7.9 million from his bank. When entering Panama, he also attempted to use a South African passport.

Whistleblower Awards and Kickbacks

The Forest Park Medical Center Dallas case is a bit unique because it involves a hospital that doesn’t accept Medicare or Medicaid. Even that facility, however, accepted Federal Employee Compensation Act (FECA) and Tricare funds.  FECA is the defacto workers compensation carrier for many government workers including postal service workers. Tricare pays for the healthcare of Department of Defense employees.

Cash whistleblower rewards are available whenever a contractor or healthcare provider violates federal anti-kickback laws and federal or state healthcare dollars are in play. That means Medicaid, Medicare, workers comp or Tricare. Under the False Claims Act, whistleblowers can receive a reward of between 15% and 30% of whatever the court collects from wrongdoers. With wrongdoers responsible for triple damages and high fines, the rewards are often huge.

It doesn’t matter if the kickbacks are paid to patients, doctors or even hospitals. In this case, the hospital was paying the kickbacks in the hopes of bringing in expensive surgeries into the facility.

In many cases we see, corrupt clinics and hospitals use paid patient recruiters. These folks are paid to round patients and bring them in for treatment they often don’t need. Patient recruiters look for potential patients at homeless shelters, in senior centers, Methadone clinics and even on the street. The patients are paid bribes in the form of cash, cigarettes or alcohol. Once again, paying for patients is illegal.

To see if you qualify for a Medicare fraud whistleblower reward, visit our healthcare whistleblower page or contact us directly online, by email at *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct). All inquiries are kept strictly confidential.

Note: Not all defendants have been convicted. Some are awaiting trial. Statements in this blog were made in court records or by prosecutors. We remind everyone that defendants are presumed innocent until found guilty.

The post “We Need More Bodies” – Anti-Kickback Whistleblower Post appeared first on Mahany Law.

Freedom Mortgage Can’t Shake 2 TCPA Class Actions In NJ

(66K)

Freedom Mortgage Corp. lost separate bids to escape two putative class actions over allegedly unsolicited phone calls when a New Jersey federal judge ruled Thursday that the customers’ lawsuits supported their claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

U.S. District Judge Jerome B. Simandle denied Freedom Mortgage’s motions to dismiss the proposed class actions alleging in part that the New Jersey-based business made such calls using an automatic telephone dialing system, or ATDS, and ignored the plaintiffs’ requests that the calls stop.

The judge also rejected the company’s alternative requests to stay the cases pending guidance from the Federal Communications Commission regarding what constitutes an ATDS in the wake of the D.C. Circuit’s March 16 ruling in ACA International v. Federal Communications Commission et al. The D.C. Circuit struck down the commission’s broad definition of an ATDS.

In each matter, Judge Simandle found that a stay is unnecessary because “the statutory definition of an ATDS (as opposed to the FCC’s interpretation of an ATDS) was not questioned in either ACA International or Dominguez,” referring to the Third Circuit’s June 26 opinion in Dominguez v. Yahoo Inc., which addressed the scope of ACA International.

“Whatever guidance the FCC may issue in the future will not alter the statutory definition of an ATDS,” the judge said in his written opinion in connection with Freedom Mortgage’s request to stay one of the putative class actions.

“For purposes of the instant motion, whether Plaintiff have plausibly alleged FMC contacted them using telephone dialing equipment that falls within the TCPA’s statutory definition of an ATDS may be determined by applying the statute and previous FCC guidance that was not changed by ACA International,” Judge Simandle said.

The judge issued similar findings with respect to Freedom Mortgage’s request to stay the other proposed class action.

One of the lawsuits was filed last August by Pennsylvania residents Joshua Somogyi and Kelly Whyle.

Somogyi, who obtained a mortgage from the company in 2012, according to the judge’s opinion in that matter. They have alleged that Freedom Mortgage later made unsolicited telemarketing calls to their residence and Joshua Somogyi’s cellphone, the opinion said.

Judge Simandle concluded that the Somogyis have “plausibly alleged that FMC improperly contacted Mr. Somogyi’s cellular phone using an ATDS, that FMC used a prerecorded or artificial voice to contact Plaintiff’ residential telephone line, and that Plaintiff asked FMC to stop calling them on both lines at issue and FMC ignored their requests.”

The judge rejected Freedom Mortgage’s assertion that the Somogyis were not called using “a random or sequential number generator” — as required to be considered part of an ATDS — because “all the numbers preloaded in the calling system belong to FMC customers, rather than the public at large.”

“A calling system is no less random if the machine’s universe is the hundreds of thousands of customers, or the residents of a state, or the residents of a nation. Otherwise, the logic of Defendant’s position would lead to the conclusion that a system containing fewer than all the telephones in the world is a preselected, limited universe, and therefore not ‘random.’ Congress could not intend such an absurd result,” Judge Simandle said.

The second proposed class action was filed in December by Minnesota resident Stewart Sieleman, who said he began receiving calls to his cellphone from Freedom Mortgage after his mortgage was transferred to the company in 2015, according to the judge’s opinion in his case. The calls urged him to refinance his mortgage with the business, the opinion said.

Judge Simandle found that Sieleman has “plausibly alleged that FMC improperly contacted him using an ATDS, and that the TCPA required Plaintiffs prior express written consent here.”

Freedom Mortgage argued that no such consent was needed, because that requirement “‘does not apply to calls that are placed to a number which the called party provided in connection with an existing debt,’” according to the judge’s opinion.

Even assuming that Sieleman had provided his cellphone number on his loan application years beforehand, “this Court is unpersuaded by FMC’s argument because calls from a mortgage lender offering refinancing services are not made ‘in connection with an existing debt,’” Judge Simandle said.

The judge said that “calls to customers soliciting refinance are ‘telemarketing’ calls for a new product requiring prior express written consent under the TCPA.”

One of the attorneys representing the Somogyis, Brian H. Mahany of Mahany Law, told Law360 on Thursday via email, “Our clients appreciate Judge Simandle’s quick decision and look forward to litigating the case on the merits.”

“The TCPA defense bar tried to delay the case in the hopes of future FCC guidance. As the court noted, future FCC guidance ‘will not alter the statutory definition of ATDS [autodialers]’. Consumers are fed up with these calls. There is no reason to wait another year in the hopes that the FCC will better define what an autodialer is and isn’t,” Mahany said.

“Technology may change, but Judge Simandie demonstrated that common sense prevails,” Mahany added. “Notwithstanding the heavy reliance by the TCPA defense bar on the recent DC Circuit decision questioning the FCC’s definition of autodialers (ACA International vs FCC), a properly pled complaint can withstand a motion to dismiss.”

Counsel for Sieleman and Freedom Mortgage could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday.

The Somogyis are represented by Eric Lechtzin, Arthur Stock and Lawrence J. Lederer of Berger & Montague PC and Brian H. Mahany and Timothy J. Granitz of Mahany Law.

Sieleman is represented by Arthur Stock of Berger & Montague PC and Stefan Louis Coleman of The Law Offices of Stefan Coleman LLC.

Freedom Mortgage is represented in the Somogyi matter by Meredith C. Slawe and Michael W. McTigue Jr. of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and Katie Bailey Garayoa of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. Freedom Mortgage is represented in the Sieleman matter by David G. Murphy and Travis A. Sabalewski of Reed Smith LLP.

The cases are Joshua Somogyi and Kelly Whyle Somogyi v. Freedom Mortgage Corp. and Stewart Sieleman v. Freedom Mortgage Corp., case numbers 1:17cv06546 and 1:17cv13110, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

The post Law360 appeared first on Mahany Law.

Federal Judge Greenlights Lawsuit Filed by Freedom Mortgage Customers For Repetitive and Unwanted Telemarketing Calls

Robocalls… Everybody hates them. Even the people that work in the call centers making these calls hates them. One person who worked making calls for an insurance company tells us half the people who worked at her call center were stoned. That doesn’t surprise us.

It shouldn’t come as any surprise that very few consumers respond favorably to unwanted telemarketing calls. That already low percentage gets worse when the recipient of the call is on the federal Do Not Call list. People add their names to that list for a reason. Unfortunately, millions of auto-dialed calls are illegally made each day.

The war being waged between telemarketers and consumers has become one of technology. Shady telemarketers ignore the do not call list and use autodialers to call tens of thousands of people daily. If someone actually picks up, the call is then transferred to a live operator. These same shady telemarketers have also developed technology to spoof phone numbers in an effort to trick the recipient’s caller ID.

Our side has some tricks up its sleeve too. Software companies now offer a variety of apps such as RoboKiller and NoMoRobo. For a small fee, these services identify suspicious callers and block unwanted telemarketing calls.

In 1991, Congress passed the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. That law restricts the making of telemarketing calls, the use of automatic telephone dialing systems and artificial or prerecorded voice messages. Outlawing so called robo calls should be easy but telemarketers won’t give up. Like many laws, the rapid growth of technology has made it increasingly difficult for lawmakers and regulators to keep up. This post looks at some of the legal issues that have surfaced and how consumers can fight back.

Consumers Sue Freedom Mortgage over Unwanted Unwanted Telemarketing Calls

In a recent case in New Jersey, Freedom Mortgage sought to dodge a class action complaint about its telemarketing practices. The case was filed by a Pennsylvania couple tired of receiving unwanted telemarketing calls. When requests to be placed on Freedom’s Do Not Call list were ignored, they filed a Telephone Consumer Protection Act lawsuit. That law allows consumers to receive between $500 and $1500 for each call.

To the lay person, these cases seem “cut and dried.” As this post will show, these cases are rarely that easy.

Freedom sought to dismiss the case because the plaintiffs couldn’t “plausibly allege” that Freedom 1) used an ATDS, 2) couldn’t prove that Freedom impermissibly used a prerecorded or artificial voice and 3) failed to show that the company did not comply with the couple’s do-not-call requests.

Robocalls and Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems (ATDS)

The “robo” on robocalls refers to the use of Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems. The hang up rates on telemarketing calls is extreme. Even when calls centers are located in countries with low labor rates, it is still expensive to have someone looking up phone numbers and manually dialing each call.  Enter technology and ATDS.

When originally drafted, ATDS software was in its infancy and smartphone were a dream. Congress defined ATDS in 1991 as “equipment which has the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator and to dial such numbers.”

Since enactment of the law, the FCC has struggled to keep up with technology and issue guidance to the industry and public. A recent federal appellate court case questioned the current FCC definition. The agency is working to fix its regulations but probably won’t release new rules until 2019. Even then, some companies in the telemarketing industry will certainly challenge those new rules.

Does that mean telemarketers can do whatever they want for the next few years? Of course not although some in the industry are brazen enough to act that way.

Today a simple smartphone could be used as an autodialer. They store numbers and a simple app allows the phone to dial random numbers.

So what did the court do with Freedom Mortgage?

U.S. District Court Judge Jerome Simadle outlined a common sense approach. Congress in passing the TCPA wanted “to protect individual consumers from receiving intrusive and unwanted calls.” To violate the TCPA, one must show that “the defendant [wrongdoer] called a cellular telephone number, using an ATDS without the recipient’s prior written consent.”

Before continuing, we should note this case was about calls to cell phone numbers. There are prohibitions to calling residential numbers too. We should also point out that many loan agreements, application forms and contest entries contain a consent for telemarketing calls. Companies must still maintain a do-not-call list and you can opt out at any time. Companies by law must honor your opt out request or revocation of consent. There is an exception for emergency calls.

Knowing what type of equipment a company is using is difficult for the consumer to know. Courts recognize that. If you receive a call and there is a long pause before someone picks up or a prerecorded / computer generated voice begins the call by announcing that you will be connected with an operator, chances are good that an ATDS was used.

Telemarketing Calls Using an Artificial Voice

Even if a consumer doesn’t know how the call was dialed, telemarketers are not supposed to use artificial, computer generated or prerecorded voices. Once again, as a consumer you can consent to these calls. We are assuming that for anyone reading this post, you have not consented to telemarketing calls or have revoked your consent.

Freedom attempted to argue that the call recipients couldn’t prove or didn’t prove that the messages left were done by an artificial voice. Once again, the court adopted a common sense approach. For purposes of the complaint, it was sufficient that the call recipient to simply allege that the clarity and cadence of the voice shows the voice was artificial or prerecorded.

Let’s face it. We all know the difference between an artificial voice and live voice. Technology has improved but not to the point where we can’t differentiate between real and fake voices. In the words of the court, the plaintiffs “need not offer detailed factual allegations so long as the [Complaint] offers enough factual enhancements to cross the line between possibility and plausibility…” Here that meant the call recipients need only claim that the clarity and cadence of the message indicates they were not left by a live human.

Unwanted Telemarketing Calls and Do Not Call Lists

How many of us have received a telemarketing call that as part of the message said “press one” to be removed from our list. Reputable companies honor those requests. It also the law.

Whether or not you consented to telemarketing calls, whether or not the call was placed with a predictive auto dialer and whether or not the call was made with a recorded voice, everyone has the ability to opt out of these calls. That is the final failsafe built into the law. You can always say that you don’t want to receive any more calls.

In fairness to the telemarketers, that opt out has to be clear and concise. There are no magic words or phrases that need to be uttered as long as you make it clear you want to be removed from their list or do not want to receive additional calls.

Freedom Mortgage challenged the lawsuit suggesting that consumers should allege the date and time they asked to be placed on a company’ do not call list and the exact words used to revoke consent. Does that mean if you are relaxing on a beach and receive a telemarking call you have to run to your car so as to memorialize the call specifics and how you revoked consent? That would be absurd and place an impossible burden on consumers.

Thankfully, the court agreed. Judge Simandle ruled that at the complaint stage, consumers need only plead “sufficient factual allegation to raise a reasonable inference that [Freedom Mortgage] failed to follow the internal do-not-call list requirement mandated by the FCC under the TCPA.”

This may all sound like a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo. Let’s make it simple.

Congress intended that people shouldn’t be bombarded by unwanted telemarketing calls. Despite some very tough laws, these calls persist. In fact, FCC data show the problem is getting worse. Spoofing technology and third party call centers outside the jurisdiction of US courts has made the problem worse.

Adding to the problem are companies that think they can skirt the law by holding the public to an impossibly high standard. Although having a recording one of these calls is helpful, merely keeping a log is more than enough.

I Am Getting Unwanted  Telemarketing Calls, What Can I Do to Make Them Stop?

We won’t take a case based on one call but if you can reasonably demonstrate that you received multiple calls and that the calls continued even after you asked them to stop, you may have a viable Telephone Consumer Protection Act case.

You may be eligible for damages of between $500 and $1500 per call. Obviously, if you are receiving these calls, keep a log as each call is a violation.

Because the Act has a legal fee provision, it is easier than ever to bring action against these callers.

For more information, visit our website for a wide variety of TCPA resources including or robocall / telemarketing information page and our industry specific page for unwanted mortgage company telemarking calls and contact attorney Brian Mahany online, by email at *protected email* or by phone at 202-971-9791.

Work for a call center? We would love to speak with you – even anonymously – and learn more about what is going in the industry.  Please contact attorney Mahany directly at 414-704-6731.

[Ed. Note: Mahany Law attorneys Brian Mahany and Tim Granitz serve as co-lead counsel for consumers in the class action lawsuit against Freedom Mortgage Company.

For additional coverage of this case, see today’s article in Law360.]

The post Tired of Robocalls? Court OKs Freedom Mortgage Lawsuit appeared first on Mahany Law.

Wells Fargo Whistleblowers and the Mortgage Modification Wrongful Foreclosure Scandal

Ahhh, Wells Fargo (or Hells’ Cargo as it is affectionately known in the office.) How can a company be so inept? Scandal after scandal after scandal. This time, regulators are demanding answers about why the company wrongfully foreclosed on hundreds of homes. Entire families displaced and put on the streets.

What does Wells Fargo have to say? “We want to satisfy our customers’ financial needs and help them succeed financially. This unites us around a simple premise: Customers can be better served when they have a relationship with a trusted provider that knows them well, provides reliable guidance, and can serve their full range of financial needs.”

Somehow tens of thousands of families don’t think Wells Fargo is their “trusted provider.”

Buried in a regulatory filing was a disclosure that for a five year period, a computer glitch caused “certain accounts” to be improperly denied a mortgage modification. The bank is setting aside $8 million to compensate those families. In our opinion, $8 million isn’t enough to compensate a single family whose home was taken from them.

It’s not like the bank can give their houses back. Cherished childhood memories gone. And all because the bank made another mistake. But who is responsible for those mistakes, it is certainly not the rank and file employees (although they are the ones taking the flack).

Assuming that the bank is correct and only 400 homes were wrongfully taken, $8 million comes out to be $20,000 per homeowner. Where can you buy a home for $20,000? In most markets, that is not enough for a down payment. And who will loan money to someone who just went through a foreclosure?

The credit scores of those folks are ruined. Bankruptcy? That could hurt someone’s employment chances. Pulling kids out of school and moving them mid-semester? How do you compensate for that?

We believe that Wells Fargo simply hopes that most down-on-their-luck former homeowners won’t find lawyers and won’t sue.

Another thing that bothers us is that Wells Fargo has been silent on what efforts they are making to find these affected homeowners. Assuming the bank can even identify them.

The banks claims that approximately 400 people have lost their home. We think the number is in the tens of thousands. How do we know?

We have spoken with hundreds of borrowers who tried to navigate through the mortgage modification process. Most claim they were forced to resubmit the same paperwork over and over. Along the way, many just gave up.

Thousands just walked away from their home. They spent every dollar they had on fighting the bank. A bank that has almost two TRILLION dollars in assets. As one former homeowner said to us, “there are bank robbers and then there are ‘robbery banks.’”

Many clients have told us that they were instructed to skip three payments so they could qualify for a modification. They did so, qualified for a modification, made the trial payments yet still lost their home.

This latest scandal involves faulty loan modifications. But this time isn’t Wells Fargo’s first time at the rip off rodeo. Just five weeks ago, the bank was accused of using complex financial investments to rip off mom and pop investors.

And who can forget the fiasco over millions of accounts opened without their customers’ permission? Repossessing cars?? The list goes on and on.

Unfortunately, Wells Fargo has become such a joke that you almost know that any news story that begins with the words “Wells Fargo” is going to end badly!

Wells Fargo Whistleblowers

Despite the wake of destruction that Wells Fargo has left behind, the rank and file people who work there are wonderful.  Hard working, concerned… and unfortunately, powerless to fix things.

While the class lawyers are lining up to help the latest round of victims, we are looking for Wells Fargo whistleblowers.

The best way to fix things at Wells Fargo is by breaking up the bank. Senior management is too diseased and the corporate culture too far gone. Unfortunately, many folks in Congress don’t have the stomach to take on America’s third largest bank. There really is something to that slogan, “Too big to fail.”

[One ray of sunshine… in February, the Federal Reserve ordered that Wells Fargo can’t grow its asset base until it “fixes” its problems. But what does “fix” mean and how serious is the Fed?]

If Congress won’t break up the bank just yet, the next best strategy is empowering rank and file employees to fix things. And Congress did just that by passage of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act. FIRREA for short.

That law empowers Wells Fargo whistleblowers to report misconduct by the bank and receive rewards of up to $1.6 million. If we can build an SEC whistleblower case, there is no limit on the size of the reward.

Why file for an award?

First, under a 2018 United States Supreme Court case, workers no longer are protected by the anti-retaliation provisions of Dodd-Frank unless they file with the SEC. Calling a company’s ethics hotline doesn’t protect you. Instead, it could get you FIRED.

Second, filed whistleblower cases have a much stronger chance of getting investigated and prosecuted. They go to the front of the line.

Third, is knowing that you made a difference in stopping greed and corruption.

And finally, there are the awards. Multimillion dollar rewards are possible but only of you file. (And usually that also means being the first to file.)

Two Bank of America whistleblowers made a combined recovery in excess of $100,000,000.00. When big banks engage in big wrongdoing, big rewards are possible.

We speak with bank whistleblowers every day. Unfortunately, that means we know that not every incident of Wells Fargo’s wrongdoing has likely been made public yet.

Political winds change constantly but even the bank’s staunchest political allies are unable to continue to fix Timothy Sloan’s messes.

Calling for Wells Fargo Whistleblowers

If you have inside information of wrongdoing involving a bank or financial services company, call us. For more information please visit our FIRREA whistleblower information page. Ready to see if you qualify for an award? Contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at (414) 704-6731. All inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept strictly confidential.

The post Wells Fargo Whistleblowers Post – What Employees Need to Know appeared first on Mahany Law.

Medical Device Maker AngioDynamics to Pay $12.5 Million

A New York medical device manufacturer must pay $12.5 million to resolve claims that the company defrauded Medicare. Prosecutors say that AngioDynamics lied about the safety of its products.

Court documents reveal that the company served as the distributor for two medical device products, LC Bead and the Perforator Vein Ablation Kit (PVAK). The science behind these medical devices may be complex but prosecutors say the fraud was pretty easy to understand. “The basic legal rule in this area could be mastered by a third-grader: Don’t lie,” said San Antonio U.S. Attorney John F. Bash. “If you do, you will be held accountable. This settlement reflects that.”

LC Bead Product

Beginning in May 2006 AngioDynamics served as the U.S. distributor for Biocompatibles plc, the manufacturer of LC Bead. The LC Bead is a drug-delivery device designed to be used with chemotherapy drugs. Highly toxic tumor drugs can be loaded into tiny beads that are supposed to dissolve slowly in the body and help the medication get to the source of the cancerous tumor.

Although twice declined for approval by the FDA, AngioDynamics claimed the device was “better”, “superior”, “safer” and “less toxic” than alternative treatments. Prosecutors say the company did not have enough evidence to support these claims. In fact, use of the product could actually be harmful given the highly toxic nature of the cancer drugs which are loaded into the beads.

Prosecutors also claim that because the company knew that use of the device was not approved, physicians were instructed to use inaccurate billing codes when submitting claims for reimbursement.

According to the complaint, the company received approval for clinical trials of the beads. The FDA wanted the beads tested for both safety and efficacy. Instead of conducting those trials, however, it appears the company filed a false FDA Form 510 clearance notice and continued marketing the device.

Internal marketing materials given to sales reps said, “So… Are you ready to hit the field with this incredible product? Launch is NOW…You have continuous support between the RITA and Biocompatible team! Best of all you are now going to make a tremendous amount of money!!”

Medicare fraud cases are almost always motivated by greed but this case was worse. It also involved a grave risk to patients, patients who because of their cancer already have incredibly weak immune systems.

Kickbacks and the “Oncology Referral Program”

It was bad enough that AngioDynamics was lying to its sales force and physicians. To push sales even more, a sales rep says the company created an Oncology Referral Program that would pay doctors between $1,000 and $2,000 to promote the LC Bead device.

Doctors who performed a lot of procedures with the LC Bead device were invited to be on the company’s speaker board. They would then be paid to lecture about the product at dinners paid for by the company.

Under federal and most state laws, kickbacks are illegal. While it probably is probably okay for a medical device sales rep to buy a cup of coffee for a physician during a sales call, expensive dinners or paying “speaker fees” to doctors who frequently use the device isn’t kosher. They are considered kickbacks or bribes.

By 2011, the company began to sense that it had pushed the envelope too far. Instead of cleaning up their act, however, a sales rep instead claims the cover up became even more sinister. The lawsuit says the company created a Medical Science Liaison to “prevent” off-label promotion of LC Bead. In reality, however, members of that team were actually helping push the product for off-label use.

PVAK Device

Of the $12.5 million settlement, $11.5 was allocated to the LC Bead device while $1 million was attributed to fraud involving the Perforator Vein Ablation Kit. The PVAK device uses a laser to close or collapse nonfunctioning veins. The FDA approved the device for superficial veins only. In 2011, the company sought approval to use on perforator veins.

A superficial vein is one near the surface of the skin. Perforator veins are called that because they “perforate” muscle tissue and connect the superficial veins with deep veins.

The FDA denied the company’s request to use the device on perforator veins until more testing and safety data was available.

Instead of complying with the FDA, prosecutors say the company merely changed the product name and continued to market it for treatment of perforator veins.

In announcing the PVAK portion of the settlement, a Justice Department official said, “This settlement reflects the expectation that medical device manufacturers will give doctors accurate information about devices they manufacture and underscores the vital role of the False Claims Act in protecting the public fisc.”

Whistleblower Awards and Medical Devices

Medical devices must be FDA approved in order to be eligible for Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. And devices that are FDA approved can only be used for approved purposes. While the devices marked by AngioDynamics may have been safe, there is no way of knowing that without rigorous clinic studies. That is why medical devices need FDA approval.

Pharmaceutical companies and device makers violate the law when they begin marketing products without such studies and approvals. Obviously, lying to the physicians who are using these devices is also illegal.

The case against AngioDynamics was filed by Ryan Bliss, a company sales rep. Bliss claims that when he first began marketing the LC Bead product, he believed it had been approved by both the FDA and European regulatory authorities. Years later he discovered the product had been denied approval.

Ryan Bliss was awarded a $2.3 million whistleblower award.

If you have information about companies selling unapproved medical devices or pushing those devices for unapproved purposes, give us a call. Your actions may save a life and you may be eligible for a cash award.

The False Claims Act authorizes rewards of between 15% and 30% of whatever the government collects from wrongdoers. Collecting a reward involves filing a sealed lawsuit in federal court. That scares some folks away but we handle that and you never have to pay us legal fees or costs unless we first recover money for you.

For more information, contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct). All inquiries are protected by the attorney-client privilege and kept completely confidential.

Ed. Note: AngioDynamics was allowed to settle without any admission of wrongdoing. The claims made in this post are from court records and statements made by the Department of Justice.

The post Justice Department to Medical Device Co: “Don’t Lie” appeared first on Mahany Law.

In April, we wrote about the importance of pharmaceutical fraud whistleblowers and received some great questions from our readers on what types of FDA violations constitute a “false claim,” what rights pharmaceutical whistleblowers have, and the FDA pharma whistleblower claims process.

To help pharmaceutical professionals who know of a domestic or international pharmaceutical manufacturer, compounding pharmacy, drug company or distributor that is involved in FDA CGMP violations, mislabeled drugs, misrepresented product ingredients, adulterated products or defective medical devices, we have prepared this step by step guide to pharmaceutical whistleblower lawsuits.

U.S. Government Recruits Insiders to Fight Bad Pharma

Over the last 18 years, pharmacists filled some 112 million prescriptions with drugs that turned out to be contaminated, under-potent, over-potent or otherwise unsafe. And those are just the medications that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) knows about. Millions more unsafe drugs are circulating in and out of pharmacy shelves daily.

There are several reasons for the poor state of U.S. pharmaceuticals, all of which come down to time and profits. First, 55% of Americans are taking prescription medications regularly, four drugs per person on average – not including over-the-counter drugs, vitamins and supplements.

With this enormous demand, drug manufacturers are pressured to keep up the pace, often cutting corners in quality control and ignoring FDA current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) requirements.

Second, 80% to 85% of prescription drugs are now manufactured overseas, usually in China or India. This international pharmaceutical supply chain makes efficient pharmaceutical regulation tougher and tougher. Many Chinese and Indian factories aren’t heavily regulated and have no reason to maintain a sterile environment or conduct regular quality control testing.

Some reports suggest that up to 40% of drugs manufactured in India are “sub-standard.” Many dishonest drug manufacturers will try to save money by diluting medications with filler or skimping on testing batches for appropriate doses of primary ingredients.

They will also hide bad test results to avoid embarrassing recalls. The media attention that one recall receives can persuade millions of consumers to switch to an alternate medication made by a different company.

In addition, the FDA is understaffed. Inspectors are barely able to inspect major manufacturing facilities every two years. And when they do, companies often know about the inspection months in advance, giving them time to clean up, falsify testing data and hide non-compliance.

When dishonest pharmaceutical companies receive FDA warning letters, they either ignore them or lie to the FDA and hide evidence of CGMP violations. There is simply no way the FDA can effectively monitor every pharmaceutical manufacturing facility.

Because of the significant threat to public health and taxpayer dollars, the FDA, Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General are actively recruiting insiders – those who work within these companies – to detect and report drug manufacturing violations.

By utilizing federal and state False Claims Acts, the government is able to offer large financial incentives to insiders who chose to come forward.

Who Are Pharmaceutical Whistleblowers?

A string of recent False Claims Act successes involving FDA CGMP violations has prompted increasing numbers of pharmaceutical industry workers to come forward with knowledge of FDA violations, adulterated pharmaceutical fraud and other drug manufacturing fraud.

Common FDA Pharma Whistleblowers include former and current:

• Drug or medical device quality assurance (QA) professionals
• Drug calibration specialists
• Pharmaceutical sales representatives
• Public health administrators
• Drug manufacturing and medical device company executives
• Other drug safety or quality control specialists

Anyone with information on FDA CGMP violations can file a whistleblower complaint, even third-party agents, outsiders and international parties. All you need is original source information of false claims against a government program.

You need not be a U.S. citizen or even a resident to receive an award. With so many pharmaceutical companies located offshore, many whistleblowers from outside the United States are now stepping forward to do their part to fight corruption and bad pharmaceutical practices.

Many readers have asked us whether they are eligible for an award if they work at a compounding pharmacy regulated by the state.

Ever since the 25 tragic meningitis deaths that investigators believe were caused by unsterile conditions at the New England Compounding Center, both states and the FDA have been more actively monitoring conditions at compounding pharmacies.

If a drug is produced at the pharmacy and eligible for Medicare / Medicaid / Tricare reimbursement, violations of CGMP and other regulations – state OR federal – are potentially eligible for awards.

Government employees are an exception. If you are a government employee and your duties primarily involve ferreting out fraud or misconduct, you may be ineligible for an award. An experienced pharmaceutical whistleblower attorney can help you determine your award eligibility.

Remember, if you choose to make a report directly to the FDA, anonymously or not, you are not eligible for an award. Only whistleblowers who comply with all requirements of the False Claims Act are eligible for awards.

How Does the FDA Regulate Drug Manufacture?

Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the FDA regulates not only the manufacturing of prescription medications but also many of the component ingredients.

The Act requires that pharmaceutical suppliers of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), intermediates and excipients follow current good manufacturing practices (CGMP) in the manufacturing, processing, packing, and storage of these raw materials [21 C.F.R. §210].

In addition, the FDA requires that pharmaceutical laboratories establish “scientifically sound and appropriate specifications, standards, sampling plans, and test procedures designed to assure that components, drug product containers, closures, in-process materials, labeling, and drug products conform to appropriate standards of identity, strength, quality, and purity.” [21 C.F.R. §211]

Through its CGMP regulations, the FDA also regulates raw material acquisition, facility equipment maintenance, staff qualifications, quality management systems, standard operating procedures (SOPs), testing lab operation, sterile environments and data and quality control records protocols (you can find FDA pharmaceutical manufacturing guidelines in C.F.R. Title 21, §§ 1-99, 200-499, and 600-1299).

Though international facilities manufacture a majority of the APIs and excipients that are sold to U.S. formulators today, they are still subject to FDA regulations and must produce the same standard of quality as any domestic manufacturer.

Typically, when an FDA inspection or complaint suggests that a pharmaceutical supplier is manufacturing FDA-regulated products without meeting CGMP requirements, the FDA will take several actions.

In cases that don’t pose an immediate threat to public safety, the FDA will issue a Form 483 to notify the company of the findings.

If the company doesn’t respond, the FDA will issue a warning letter and give the facility a chance to correct the violations. If the misconduct continues, the FDA can ban products from U.S. importation or order the facility to stop producing until they can prove CGMP compliance.

Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, a drug or device produced in non-compliance with FDA CGMP regulations is considered “adulterated.” Once the FDA issues a warning letter regarding CGMP non-compliance, the drug in question can be considered adulterated.

The Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act prohibits any adulterated drug from being introduced (or delivered for introduction) into interstate commerce. Pharmaceutical companies that don’t comply with FDA CGMP regulations are in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and can face both civil and criminal penalties.

All the government has to prove to prevail on an adulteration charge is that the manufacturer failed to comply with CGMP regulations. The drug doesn’t actually have to be faulty or substandard in quality or purity.

Examples of FDA CGMP Violations

If you work in pharmaceutical manufacturing, you have likely had FDA CGMP regulations drilled into your brain. Most U.S. facilities hold regular compliance meetings to ensure everyone understands what is expected. They may also conduct regular, relaxed internal inspections to determine how compliant they are with FDA regulations.

You will likely have an employment manual stating FDA CGMP regulations. You can also find FDA pharmaceutical guidelines in C.F.R. Title 21, §§ 1-99, 200-499, and 600-1299.

Briefly, here is a list of examples that constitute FDA CGMP violations (taken from several FDA warning letters):

• Analytical anomalies (like relying on assay results obtained from the average of two independent sample results when one of the sample results was out of spec (OOS)
• Destruction of batch record documents prior to one year following expiration
• Failure to establish and follow procedures to prevent contamination of sterile products
• Failure to establish written control protocols that ensure product strength, purity and quality
• Failure to investigate OOS batches, and then examine other batches and products associated with the spec failure
• Failure to investigate repeated contamination
• Failure to maintain validated computer systems
• Failure to propose corrective action and review other production records to ensure no additional incidents
• Failure to reject test batches OOS for identity, strength, quality and purity
• Failure to review and approve all drug production records for compliance before release
• Failure to routinely and appropriately maintain manufacturing equipment
• Failure to write validation protocols, isolate process parameters, and demonstrate that product performance is consistent and reproducible from batch to batch
• Omission, addition or alteration of raw data from lab control records
• Poor cleaning and sanitization practices
• Poor electronic data management
• Preparing, packing and holding products in unsanitary conditions
• Significant deviations in bulk drug substance and drug component manufacture
• SOPs are outdated, aren’t CGMP compliant or aren’t readily accessible
• Unqualified, untrained or inexperienced employees engaged in the manufacture, processing, packing or holding of a drug
• Using lots prior to testing and quality control approval

Unfortunately, many pharmaceutical companies are in dangerous violation of FDA CGMP regulations.

Several years ago, many Americans were killed after Baxter Pharmaceuticals relied on a Chinese producer to make its heparin API. The FDA alleged the supplier used a chemically similar, but medically worthless, ingredient to pass quality control testing.

Again, it likely came down to money. There was a huge difference in cost between the real heparin API ($900 per pound) versus the fake ($9 per pound).

For the tragic story of one of the many victims of Baxter’s defective heparin, read the Faces of Pharma Tragedy – Rest in Peace Randy Hubley.

In a 2016 inspection of a Vista Pharmaceuticals plant in India, FDA investigators found corroded manufacturing equipment. Prior to the inspection, the FDA received a complaint about isoxsuprine hydrochloride (Vasodilan) pills that were shipped to the U.S. The pills contained metal fragments.

It turns out that Vista never bothered getting the isoxsuprine approved nor did it submit a validation process for the drug manufacturing process to the FDA.

When Are FDA Violations FCA Liable?

Companies that fail to comply with FDA regulations not only violate the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. They may also be in violation of federal and state False Claims Acts (FCAs). When this is the case, you may be eligible for a cash whistleblower award.

The government doesn’t like the fraud, waste or abuse of taxpayer dollars. And manufacturing substandard products that are paid for by taxpayer-funded programs like Medicare, Medicaid or TRICARE is exactly that.

When these programs are billed for adulterated drugs, each bill is considered a “false claim.” Medicare, Medicaid and TRICARE guarantee a certain standard of service and performance. Anything that falls below that standard doesn’t qualify for payment – including adulterated drugs.

Pharmaceutical companies may violate the FCA by selling adulterated drugs, or by receiving funding from Medicare or other government-funded programs to produce products. Medical device manufacturers are equally susceptible to FCA liability.

Under the federal False Claims Act, companies who provide substandard products (that violate FDA CGMP regulations) must pay a fine of $11,000 to $21,000 per false claim in civil penalties, plus three times the government’s damages [31 U.S.C. §3729].

Considering the number of prescription medications billed to these programs, this amount can easily fall in the ten-million to hundred-million-dollar range.

For example, if a drug manufacturer makes an adulterated drug, causing the submission of $20 million in false claims to Medicare, that drug manufacturer could be liable for damages of up to $60 million – plus a civil penalty of up to $21,000 for each and every prescription of adulterated drugs Medicare paid for.

If 10,000 bottles of the adulterated drug were paid for by Medicare, the drug manufacturer could be fined a civil penalty of up to $210 million dollars – plus the $60 million in damages.

This is where the financial incentive for blowing the whistle comes in.

Under the FCA, when a whistleblower’s original source information leads to a successful government settlement or verdict, the whistleblower is entitled to collect between 15% and 30% of the total government recovery.

In the example above, if a QA officer was the one to discover the CGMP violations and report the fraud, that QA officer could collect between $40.5 million and $81 million in a cash whistleblower award.

In 2017 alone, the federal government paid out $635 million to whistleblowers. This is how seriously the government takes whistleblowers and the life-saving information they can provide.

Without the specialized knowledge of persons working from the inside these facilities, the government would be significantly less likely to learn of fraud, waste or abuse of taxpayer dollars. Without the aid of pharmaceutical whistleblowers, the risk to public safety would be exponentially higher.

Are Pharma Whistleblowers Protected by Law?

With the massive cash awards and the potential to stop harmful fraud, why don’t more people blow the whistle?

For many, the answer is fear – fear of company retaliation, fear of career destruction. Retaliation is an unfortunate reality for the pharmaceutical whistleblower.

Colleagues may ostracize you. You may be harassed or fired. You may be transferred, demoted, denied a promotion, or discriminated against in some other way.

The government knows how hard blowing the whistle can be. So they have included several provisions in the False Claims Act to protect whistleblowers and correct any adverse action taken against an employee who raises concerns.

First, despite what your employment agreement may say regarding HIPPA violations and releasing internal information, the HIPPA Privacy Rule has a strong exemption for those who chose to report misconduct.

Many pharmaceutical companies use the threat of prosecution for HIPPA violations to keep their employees quiet. But know that any protected information that suggests misconduct can legally be shared with a FDA Pharma Whistleblower lawyer or public health agency.

Second, the FCA protects whistleblowers by requiring that claims be initially filed under seal. This means the defendant will not be made aware of any whistleblower claim for at least 60 days.

During this time, the government will conduct its investigation into your claim. If the government needs more time, they can obtain an extension. In some cases, a whistleblower claim may remain under seal for years. (Expect the case will be under seal at least 6 months or more.)

Once the investigation concludes, the case will be unsealed, at which point you may become identified as the whistleblower. But this window of anonymity is very helpful for individuals who want time to prepare for any repercussions or seek other employment.

In addition, both federal and state whistleblower laws have powerful anti-retaliation provisions. Under the federal FCA 31 U.S.C. §3730(h), it is illegal for any company to discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because the employee has sought to stop an employer from engaging in misconduct.

Any individual who experiences retaliation from their employer for attempting to report misconduct, whether internally or to an outside source, can file a claim for damages.

These damages may include job reinstatement at the same level of seniority, twice any amount of lost wages or backpay, and compensation for any “special damages” incurred as a result of the retaliatory treatment.

8 Steps to a Successful Pharmaceutical Whistleblower Claim

FDA whistleblower claims are a complex process, with many potential snares. You must know how to protect your original source information, how to gather evidence legally and how to navigate some challenging procedural processes.

But a successful FDA Pharma Whistleblower claim also comes with numerous rewards – a large financial award, the ability to replenish misspent taxpayer dollars, and the power to stop potentially deadly medications from entering the market. It also means knowing that you made a difference.

By following these 8 Steps to a Successful FDA Pharma Whistleblower Claim, you will be off to a solid start.

Step #1: Contact a Pharmaceutical Whistleblower

From the moment you suspect a pharmaceutical company of committing an FDA CGMP violation, before you do anything else, find an experienced whistleblower lawyer that understands False Claims Act cases and has a solid track record.

Don’t be shy about asking your lawyer to discuss his or her track record, experience and willingness to try the case if the government declines to prosecute.

Don’t worry about lawyer fees. Whistleblower cases are typically handled on a contingency or “success” fee basis, meaning the lawyer earns nothing if you do not get an award.

A reputable whistleblower attorney won’t ask for any fees up front. Your lawyer will provide all expenses and only collect their fee when you collect your cash whistleblower award.

Make sure you contact a lawyer before you report your suspicions to your co-workers, supervisors or other internal sources and before you begin collecting documents or other evidence.

Do not call government agencies or hotlines until you speak with a lawyer. Reporting fraud to an agency or hotline won’t get you an award and may even diminish your chances for recovery.

An established attorney will be able to help you:

• Decide whether you have a potential FCA case
• Estimate how much reward money you may be eligible for
• Protect your identity and career
• Protect your original source information
• Handle special challenges regarding highly confidential documents
• Decide what documents or evidence are helpful for your case
• Determine whether you can legally obtain evidence
• Organize and file a persuasive claim
• Coordinate a government review
• Adhere to procedural requirements
• Maximize your cash award amount
• Pursue an anti-retaliation claim if necessary

Remember, you will need to act quickly. Reporting is competitive and the FCA strongly favors the first whistleblower to report a fraud.

First-to file requirements apply. Statutes of limitations in FDA Pharma Whistleblower lawsuits are complex and highly dependent on each specific case. Your lawyer will be able to make certain you meet all deadlines to solidify your role as whistleblower.

Step #2: Determine Whether A False Claim Exists

In order to qualify for a whistleblower award under the federal False Claims Act, you must show that a false claim has been made against the government.

Your lawyer will be able to determine whether that potential exists by considering the extent of the FDA CGMP violation(s) and the involvement of your company in government programs like Medicare, Medicaid or TRICARE.

Note that not all FDA CGMP violations will qualify for FCA liability. Innocent mistakes aren’t usually FCA liable since FCA liability requires that the defendant act with deliberate ignorance or reckless disregard. Of course, gross negligence would be of concern to the court.

While CGMP violations that result in a foreseeably hazardous or less effective product entering the market would certainly have potential for FCA liability, a bad product is in no way required to result in false claims.

Merely lying to cover up non-compliance is enough to establish a false claim. For example, many false claims lawsuits arise for drug manufacturers who violate FDA regulations on written and electronic records and reports. These violations could include:

• Discarding production, control and distribution records prior to 1 year after batch expiration date.
• Failing to maintain and respond to corrective and protective action (CAPA) data
• Failing to notify company officials (who may not be directly involved) of any recalls, FDA reports, or regulatory actions regarding FDA CGMP regulations
• Hiding certain records from FDA inspectors
• Making false statements regarding batch quality standards or equipment maintenance
• Omitting data from records that would be used to evaluate quality standards (batch approvals and rejections, complaints, recalls, returned or salvaged drug products)

An experienced FDA Pharma Whistleblower lawyer will be able to help you determine whether a CGMP violation could be FCA liable.

Step #3: Don’t Talk to Anyone Except Your Lawyer

This includes strangers, friends, coworkers, government agencies, company ethics hotlines and the media. Because most whistleblower awards must follow first-to-file guidelines, you could lose your whistleblower eligibility if someone else decides to report your suspicions about non-compliance.

Some whistleblower laws have a “public disclosure” prohibition. That means telling anyone could jeopardize your claim. Many courts have a sealing order issued by a judge meaning that you could be sanctioned (fined, jailed, or other punitive action) and your claim dismissed for breaking confidentiality.

Remember, there is no such thing as “off the record.”

In addition, putting information on the internet or speaking on the phone can be dangerous.

Never call your attorney from a company phone or email documents from a work computer or using a work email account. There is little expectation of privacy and little legal protection of that privacy when you use a work computer, company telephone or your employee email address.

If you have any uncertainty about whether to speak with someone, ask your lawyer first.

Step #4: Gather Evidence Legally and Confidentially

Solid evidence that suggests a successful recovery is vital to persuading the government to dedicate their time and resources to your case. But gathering evidence is a delicate process. You have to make sure you obtain documents legally, quickly, confidentially and thoroughly.

Any evidence taken in violation of the law may not be admissible and may get you into trouble. At the same time, you will need to gather what you can quickly.

Its not hard for coworkers or officials to pinpoint a potential whistleblower. You could be fired without warning and immediately (and permanently) lose access to your office and files.

Several types of evidence showing CGMP violations (and/or the attempt to hide those violations) can be helpful to your case.

• Batch test results
• Billing records
• Email communications
• Internal inspection records
• Raw study data
• Video / audio files

In general, evidence obtained from public sources (media, internet, published studies, published court documents) is not going to contribute to your case (unless your analysis of that information is original).

Create a safe place to log information, including specific dates, times, incidents, phone numbers, computer IDs, places and names of relevant individuals that have any relationship to your original information regarding a potential violation.

Remember to keep information that may relate to a retaliation claim as well. (Don’t keep your log at work or on a work computer – if you are suddenly terminated you may not be able to access these records if kept at work.)

Never email yourself massive amounts of documents. Many companies have sophisticated IT programs that look for possible whistleblower activity by monitoring emails being sent to home email addresses.

An experienced FDA Pharma Whistleblower lawyer can help you determine what documents or evidence are helpful for your case and whether you can legally take these documents from the workplace.

Step #5: Draft and File Your Whistleblower Claim

After your gather enough evidence to convince the government they could be dealing with false claims involving CGMP violations, your lawyer will help you organize this evidence to draft your claim, then help you to arrange a disclosure meeting with the government where you will convince them to get involved.

Next you and your lawyer will file the claim in court and submit it to the government. Remember, the claim will be filed under seal so your company will not be notified that any action is taking place.

Step #6: Assist with the Investigation

Once the government decides to investigate your claims, they will begin collecting further evidence. Much of their initial evidence will come from you, and your whistleblower award amount increases with the level that you contribute to the government’s investigation.

Keep a running log of any information you want to share with investigators during interviews and any potential names of witnesses you may want them to speak with.

Depending on the severity of your allegations, the government’s investigation may involve the FBI and include full searches of the facility and associated facilities, numerous witness interviews and document searches. It is important that you cooperate to the best of your ability and remain available to investigators.

After the investigation, the government will decide whether or not to intervene in your whistleblower lawsuit. Should they choose to intervene, the whistleblower is eligible to collect between 15% and 25% of any government recovery.

Should they decline to intervene, the whistleblower is free to pursue the case on their own with the aid of their whistleblower lawyer (in some cases, the government may decide to intervene once the case gets rolling).

This is why hiring a lawyer who is willing to take your case all the way through trial is crucial. Switching lawyers mid-case can drastically harm your chances for success.

Whistleblowers who achieve a successful settlement or verdict in cases where the government does not intervene are eligible to collect an increased award of between 25% and 30% of the total recovery.

Step #7: Prepare for Potential Retaliation

While every whistleblower’s experience is different, there are a few things you can almost be certain of. Your identity will eventually become known, you will experience some level of retaliation, and you will likely need (or want) a new job.

Planning for these things in advance can help to lessen any stress associated with your whistleblower case.

Depending on the type whistleblower case, your identity may never be released. However, we prepare our clients for the probability their identity and whistleblower status will eventually become known.

When this happens, friends and coworkers may treat you differently. You may get calls from the media. Discuss these scenarios with your lawyer well in advance of the day it happens.

While employer retaliation in response to an employee reporting misconduct is illegal, many people who report misconduct either internally or externally will experience some form of discrimination in response to their actions. It’s much easier to bear if you are prepared.

Both federal and state whistleblower laws have strong anti-retaliation provisions that compensate whistleblowers for retaliation – but they don’t prevent it. They simply allow you to file a claim for job reinstatement, double backpay and other special damages.

If your FDA Pharma Whistleblower attorney feels you have a strong case, it may be a good idea to start considering another job or career path. Anti-retaliation laws don’t offer much immediate comfort if you suddenly find yourself without a job, and court battles can take years.

Its best to have a plan in place to support yourself and family in case you are the target of retaliation.

Unfortunately, your identity as a whistleblower can make it difficult to find a job within your same career path in the future. These factors are always important to consider earlier rather than later.

Often your whistleblower lawyer can help you keep your identity confidential, at least as to third parties and potential employers.

Step #8: Have Check in Hand Before Spending the Money

Whistleblower cash awards can be significant. A majority fall into the hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars range. One of our recent FCA cases achieved a $154 million whistleblower cash award (a $1 billion settlement)!

This is exciting, and whistleblowers more than deserve these massive cash awards for their efforts. But remember, the case isn’t over until the check is in your bank. FCA whistleblower cases require patience, and no matter how promising your case appears, it is important to remain financially smart.

Of course it is fine – even advisable – to begin planning your estate and getting guidance from financial advisors on how best to handle your upcoming cash award, but don’t make the mistake of spending more than you currently have.

While we can estimate your cash award amount, it is impossible to know the exact amount until you have it in your hands.

The Court use several factors to determine your exact award amount, including your ability to follow reporting requirements and required deadlines, the value of your information, the amount of damage resulting from the misconduct, whether or not the government intervened, the extent to which you aided the investigation, and the extent to which you participated in the misconduct (among other criteria).

Some folks are reluctant to step forward for fear that they may be prosecuted for participating in the wrongdoing. That is rarely a problem if you were simply following orders or doing what you were told. Unless you were the mastermind of the scheme, there isn’t much to worry about.

But talk to your lawyer. A good whistleblower lawyer can help determine in advance if there might be a problem or if your conduct could impact the size of the award.

What Other Pharmaceutical Whistleblower Awards Are Possible?

The federal False Claims Act described in great detail above is the primary whistleblower law in most pharmaceutical whistleblower cases. However, there are often other ways to collect an award.

Since most pharmaceutical companies are multinational corporations, they frequently do business in other countries. In fact, over three quarters of the prescription drugs sold in the United States are manufactured offshore.

In many countries, bribery and government corruption is common place. The United States has very strong laws that prohibit bribery of foreign government officials. And unfortunately, several major drug companies have run afoul of these laws.

The law preventing foreign bribery is known as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Both the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Justice Department enforce this law. Fortunately, the SEC has its own whistleblower program complete with robust anti-retaliation provisions.

Like the False Claims Act, SEC whistleblowers can earn up to 30% of what the government collects from wrongdoers. FCPA whistleblower awards are often millions of dollars.

Twenty-nine states also have their own state False Claims Act laws that cover Medicaid expenditures. Since mot drugs covered by Medicare are also covered by Medicaid, it is often possible to collect multiple awards. A good FDA whistleblower lawyer knows these laws and knows how to make claims or file suits in the various states.

There is more! Two states have private insurance whistleblower laws that might include adulterated pharmaceuticals that are eligible for reimbursement by private insurance companies like Blue Cross or Aetna.

Finally, there are several more ways for FDA pharmaceutical whistleblowers to earn an award and stop fraudulent conduct. These include pay to delay, kickbacks and off label marketing. Please visit our cornerstone content on off label marketing and kickbacks or contact us directly to learn more about these topics.

Without whistleblowers, pharmaceutical manufacturers continue to go unchecked, the cost of medical care continues to rise and the lives of our loved ones and ourselves are put in danger.

Whether you report to save a life or collect a reward, stopping counterfeit drugs from entering our stream of commerce makes you a hero.

If you have knowledge of FDA CGMP violations, mislabeled drugs, misrepresented product ingredients, adulterated products or defective medical devices, our MahanyLaw FDA Pharma Whistleblower lawyers can help protect your rights and maximize your cash award. Contact MahanyLaw today at 202.800.9791.

The post 8 Step Guide to Pharmaceutical Whistleblower Lawsuits appeared first on Mahany Law.

Few people pay much attention to what happens in the African nation of Mozambique. A quiet war is waging between Muslim jihadists and the government. To date both the jihadists (known locally as al-Shabab) and the government appear quite inept at fighting one another. The bigger battle, however, is being fought over mining rights and gas reserves in Mozambique’s Cabo Delgado province. A war many believe is being fought with bribes.

Foreign corruption is nothing new. According to Transparency International, Mozambique scores a 153 out of 180 nations on the world corruption index. That means experts believe the country is rife with corruption.

So what does that mean for companies doing business in Mozambique? It means that many are probably paying bribes to local officials.

The mining and natural resources sector is already rife with corruption. It isn’t unusual for oil and gas companies and mining concerns to bribe local officials in the hope of getting faster permits or to have officials close their eyes in connection with environmental violations. Some companies bribe government officials in order to get more favorable lease terms or to keep competitors out.

This week, the Economist reported that British company Gemfields has the rights to the world’s largest ruby mine located in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique. They say that local miners are being “shot at, beaten up and sexually abused by police officers” on behalf of Gemfields.

Do we think the police are doing this on their own? Of course not. The better explanation is that Gemfields is bribing local officials to stifle the mining claims of competitors.

Why should we care?

Honest business can’t fully compete when a rogue company decides to violate the rules and bribe government officials. Letting them get away with such activities rewards bad behavior and punishes honest companies. Those who play by the rules suffer (and so do their employees).

We certainly have no proof if any of the mining or gas exploration companies doing business in Mozambique are paying bribes. The vast gas and precious gemstone reserves, however, suggest that bribery is alive and thriving there.

Proving foreign bribery, however, is next to impossible without an insider. Until someone steps forward, we can’t get involved and Uncle Sam doesn’t know where to look.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Mozambique

In 1977 Congress passed the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as a way of leveling the playing field for honest companies. The Act makes it a criminal offense to pay or offer a bribe to a foreign government official.

Under the law, the Justice Department can criminally prosecute violators while the SEC can issue large monetary penalties. Under the SEC’s whistleblower program, the SEC can pay out up to 30% of whatever the government collects from the wrongdoer.

Although many of the big mining and energy companies doing business in Mozambique are foreign, that doesn’t mean the American government does not have jurisdiction over their activities. The SEC regularly prosecutes foreign companies caught bribing foreign government officials.

How? The SEC has jurisdiction if the company is domiciled in the United States or sells shares of its stock on a US stock exchange. Obviously, the government also has jurisdiction if any of the acts of bribery take place on U.S. soil.

Finding a way to prosecute is often easier than getting someone to step forward. Thankfully, Congress also thought and offers both rewards and anti retaliation protections to whistleblowers. To prevent retaliation, the SEC has enjoyed great success in keeping the names of whistleblowers confidential. That means you can report the violation, collect a reward and keep your employer or co-workers from knowing that the whistleblower was you.

Embraer Bribery $175 Million in Fines

In 2016, the SEC and Justice Department announced a joint prosecution of Embraer, the Brazilian aircraft manufacturer. Prosecutors claimed the company bribed government officials in Mozambique, Saudi Arabia and the Dominican Republic.

A Justice Department press release said the company used bribes to convince government officials to purchase Embraer products over rival products made by other companies. In the case of Mozambique, prosecutors say in 2008, Embraer paid $800,000 via a false agency agreement with an intermediary designated by a high-level official at Mozambique’s state-owned commercial airline, Linhas Aéreas de Moçambique S.A. (LAM), to secure LAM’s agreement to purchase two aircraft for approximately $65 million.

That type of conduct makes it harder for US aircraft manufacturers such as Boeing to successfully bid on aircraft contracts.

In announcing the prosecution, an FBI spokesperson said, “Embraer tried to bribe their way into several profitable aircraft contracts around the world. Instead of reaping a nice profit, their criminal conduct earned the Brazilian aircraft manufacturer a substantial penalty that more than wiped out their gains from these contracts.  Crime does not pay!”

The US had jurisdiction because some of the illegal acts used a NY bank and because Americans can invest in Embraer here.

The United States was not the only country to prosecute. Saudi Arabian and Brazilian authorities also levied charges against the aircraft maker.

Use of Third Parties to Hide Bribes

Today, most companies are smart enough to hide the paper trial involved in paying bribes. An auditor isn’t likely to find a line item labeled “illegal bribes.” Instead, many companies rely on third party agents to disguise the illegal payments.

In the case of Embraer, the criminal complaint said,

“Pursuant to the [purported] agency agreement [with Agent C] Embraer agreed to pay Agent C’s company $400,000 per aircraft (the exact amount Mozambique Official had previously said Embraer could “get away” with paying). However, neither Agent C nor Agent C’s company ever provided any legitimate services to Embraer. Embraer delivered the two aircraft to LAM on or about July 30, 2009, and September 2, 2009. Following the delivery of each aircraft, Agent C’s company submitted two invoices to Embraer for $400,000 each… Embraer recorded these payments as ‘Sales Commission’ and they were consolidated into Embraer’s books under ‘Net Operating (expenses) income’ as a ‘selling’ expense, specifically, ‘Sales Commission.’”

Odebrecht $420 Million Foreign Bribery Fine – “Department of Bribery”

More recently, the SEC and Justice Department fined another Brazilian company, Odebrecht and an affiliated petrochemical company, Braskem. Prosecutors say that the companies paid $788 million in bribes to government officials in at least twelve countries including, Mozambique, Angola, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela.

With respect to Mozambique, the complaint say that the companies paid a high level government official “in exchange for Odebrecht obtaining favorable terms on a government construction project, which the government had not been inclined to accept before Odebrecht offered to make the corrupt payments.”

In announcing the successful prosecution, a Justice Department official said,

“Odebrecht and Braskem used a hidden but fully functioning Odebrecht business unit—a ‘Department of Bribery,’ so to speak—that systematically paid hundreds of millions of dollars to corrupt government officials in countries on three continents.  Such brazen wrongdoing calls for a strong response from law enforcement, and through a strong effort with our colleagues in Brazil and Switzerland, we have seen just that.  I hope that today’s action will serve as a model for future efforts.”

Do You Have Information About Illegal Bribery?

The SEC Whistleblower Program pays whistleblowers – workers or third parties with inside information – up to 30% of whatever the government collects from wrongdoers in fines and penalties. Multi-million dollar awards are common.

We think whistleblowers are heroes. They help stop fraud and corporate greed. Congress likes them too, that is why they authorized such large awards and give whistleblowers wide-ranging anti-retaliation protections.

To learn more, visit our FCPA whistleblower information page. Ready to find out if you qualify for an award? Contact us online by email *protected email* or by phone 414-704-6731 (direct). All inquiries protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept completely confidential.

*To help us help you, never use a work email, work phone or work device to contact us.

The post Mozambique and Foreign Bribery (FCPA Post) appeared first on Mahany Law.

Omeed Malik Settles Discrimination, Defamation Claims Against Bank

Omeed Malik was a rising star at Bank of America. What made him somewhat unique was his Middle Eastern descent. Bank of America’s “Supporting Inclusion” diversity page proudly notes that the bank does not discriminate on the basis of gender, gender identification, sexual orientation, ethnicity, race and disability. The bank’s diversity and non-discrimination page is eerily quiet on discrimination based on age and national origin.

Until his ouster, Malik was a senior executive (managing director) of Bank of America’s prime brokerage unit. That unit primarily caters to large hedge fund clients.

Press reports indicate that a female analyst made allegations that Malik made unwanted advances towards her. That resulted in his separation from the bank and his senior executive position.

Malik denied the allegations and instead claimed that the bank suppressed evidence of his innocence. He says he was defamed by the bank and suffered discrimination because of Middle Eastern descent.

Bank of America released a statement earlier this year saying, “The bank stands by its decision to terminate Mr. Malik. His claims are without merit and we will vigorously defend ourselves in this matter.”

The case against Bank of America was filed as an arbitration claim with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Because it is an arbitration, both the records and proceedings are confidential.

In July of this year, Bank of America agreed to pay an undisclosed multi-million settlement to Omeed Malik. The exact amount and terms are confidential. The NY Post reports the settlement is in the eight figures meaning at least $10 million. Malik had sought $100 million.

Omeed Malik’s Departure from Bank of America

At 38 years old, Omeed Malik was one of the bank’s youngest senior managers.

In January a Reuters story claimed that Malik was planning on starting his own hedge fund advisory service. A day later, press reports claimed that Malik was let go after a female analyst complained of inappropriate sexual conduct. He believes the bank defamed him after learning that he was planning on opening his own business.

Malik’s case was filed as an arbitration. Many financial services companies require employment claims to be resolved through arbitration. The problem, however, is that the arbitration process is very opaque and arbitrators need not give reasons for their decisions. The lack of transparency makes it easier for financial institutions like Bank of America to avoid the negative publicity associated with their bad acts.

We suspect that the bank leaked news of the harassment claims after getting wind of his desire to start up his own firm.

Readers of this blog know that we are not fans of America’s “too big to fail” banks. That includes Bank of America. We believe that these banks have become criminal enterprises. That doesn’t mean that all the workers there are criminals, just the folks that run the bank.

Is Omeed Malik guilty of sexual harassment? We have no idea. That Bank of America decided to leak word of these allegations one day after press reports of his plans to compete with the bank makes us suspicious. The New York Post report indicating the bank paid Malik an eight figure settlement makes us even more suspicious.

If you have inside knowledge of wrongdoing by a bank or other financial institution, call us. You may be eligible to receive a cash reward for your information. Inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept confidential. There is never a fee for our services unless we first recover for you.

For more information, visit our bank fraud whistleblower page or contact us directly. We can be reached online, by email *protected email* or by phone 414-704-6731 (direct).

The post Bank of America Exec Settles $100 Million Discrimination Claim appeared first on Mahany Law.

Timeshare Workers Sue Holiday’s Lounge for Unpaid Overtime

The economy is booming, consumer spending is up yet some stingy employers still refuse to pay workers overtime. A 1930’s Depression ear statute, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), makes those practices illegal. Unless exempt, most workers are entitled to be paid overtime for all hours in excess of 40 hours during a 7 day period. The law includes most sales people working for timeshare companies.

New Timeshare Workers Overtime Complaint Filed

Jackeline Lopez worked for a Florida timeshare company called Holiday Lounge. Located in Miami, Florida, the company markets vacation packages to people throughout the United States. A timeshare is typically a resort condominium unit in which multiple parties hold rights to use the property and each owner of the same accommodation is allotted a fixed period of time to use the condo.

According to Ms. Lopez, she was hired by Holiday Lounge as a “loan verification officer.” Later she became a sales representative. Both positions involved a base pay plus commissions. She claims that she worked 50 hours per week but never received overtime pay. Her case was just filed last week.

Many salespeople believe they are not entitled to overtime. In fact, employers will often tell their workers that they are exempt. Not true. In fact only true outside sales reps are exempt.

FLSA Outside Sales Exemption

To qualify for the outside sales employee exemption, the U.S. Department of Labor says all of the following tests must be met:

• The employee’s primary duty must be making sales (as defined in the FLSA), or obtaining orders or contracts for services or for the use of facilities for which a consideration will be paid by the client or customer; and
• The employee must be customarily and regularly engaged away from the employer’s place or places of business.

Away from the employer’s place of business means,

“An outside sales employee makes sales at the customer’s place of business, or, if selling door-to-door, at the customer’s home. Outside sales does not include sales made by mail, telephone or the Internet unless such contact is used merely as an adjunct to personal calls. Any fixed site, whether home or office, used by a salesperson as a headquarters or for telephonic solicitation of sales is considered one of the employer’s places of business, even though the employer is not in any formal sense the owner or tenant of the property.”

The typical timeshare rep works from either an office, the resort site or their own home. Most sales calls are done by phone or computer. Thus they are not exempt.

Timeshare workers have long been an issue for the Department of Labor. In 2007, the agency released an opinion letter on timeshare workers and whether they were entitled to overtime.

In finding that timeshare workers were entitled to overtime, the Department looked at three types of sales reps.

“You describe three very similar groups of employees whose primary duty is to promote and to sell timeshare interests in resorts to prospective owners. The first group of employees, Group One, works from locations some distance (two to five miles) away from the resort sites. Groups Two and Three work primarily at the resorts. Group One employees greet the “prospects,” who have been scheduled by employees not at issue here, at the sales office and show them an introductory film.

“Group One employees do not have an “office” at the sales office, but merely gather at the facility a few minutes before they are scheduled to meet the prospects. After the film, the salesperson drives the prospects to the resort and gives them a tour of the property, including the residences, buildings and grounds, streets, walking paths, spas, golf courses, and other facilities the resort property offers. After touring the property and if the prospect decides to purchase a timeshare interest, the Group One salesperson returns the prospects to the sales office to handle the closing process. The total process takes 2-3 hours, and the average salesperson gives 1-3 tours a day for a total of 30-40 hours a week, but may work more from time to time.

“Group Two employees perform work almost identical to that performed by Group One employees, except that Group Two employees meet the prospects at the resort instead of at the off-site sales office, and therefore do not drive the prospects to and from the resort.

“Group Three employees are likewise very similar except that they have a larger role in scheduling their prospects. Their prospects come from people who already are staying at the resort as guests and who respond to promotional incentives, who request to see a presentation, or who are directly solicited by the salesperson. In all other material respects, all salespeople perform the same duties: greeting prospects, showing an introductory film, giving a tour of the property and any other facilities or attractions the resort property offers, closing the deal with interested prospects, and engaging in occasional sales-related training.”

The Department of Labor determined that all three groups were entitled to overtime. Their determination included the sales reps that were onsite and not working from the office. Even though some of the timeshare sellers were at the resort conducting tours, for purposes of the FLSA, the resort became the employer’s place of business.

Wyndham Pays Timeshare Workers $7.3 Million for FLSA Wage Theft

Despite clear guidance for the timeshare industry, Wyndham Worldwide Operations paid $7.3 million last year to settle charges that a class of 2,125 timeshare and vacation rental sales representatives were improperly paid.

The Wyndham case was especially troubling after allegations surfaced that the company was altering timecards.

Aware of the Department of Labor guidance on timeshare workers, Wyndham reclassified its vacation and timeshare sales staff as nonexempt in 2009. Because upper management was paid bonus based on the company’s bottom line, however, sales management violated the company’s own policies by not allowing workers to clock in for more than 40 hours and at times, even altering time records.

According to the court, “the overwhelming evidence establishes a consistent practice of prohibiting Sales Representatives from recording overtime and managers doctoring timecards to prevent overtime compensation.”

Efforts to doctor time records may have spelled doom for the ill-fated plan when a worker was reportedly deemed ineligible for medical benefits because his time cards didn’t show enough hours worked!

But for that worker stepping forward, the scheme may have continued. Evidence at trial suggested workers “were lulled into believing that underreporting actual hours did not mean anything financially because the hours would only be credited as hours at minimum wage, and therefore, recouped from their commissions.”

Damages in Fair Labor Standards Act Wage Theft Cases

Under the FLSA, timeshare workers who are victims of wage theft schemes including unpaid overtime or minimum wage violations are entitled to double pay for any unpaid hours and double pay at time and one half for any unpaid overtime hours. The Fair Labor Standards Act also has a provision for the worker’s legal fees.

Are you the Victim of Wage Theft?

Whether or not you work in the timeshare industry, you probably qualify for the law’s minimum wage and time and one half guarantees. There are exemptions for certain managers, outside sales reps and professionals, however. Don’t rely on your employer to tell you whether or not you are exempt!

Many workers are reluctant to step forward because they fear not being able to prove working “off the clock” or because they never asked for overtime. Courts have generally ruled, however, in favor of employees in these situations.

As to “off the clock” work, an employer will be held to know what it could have found out if it paid attention to what workers were doing. The legal standard is whether an employer could have learned of the worker’s activities by making reasonably diligent inquiries. Unless an employee deliberately hides working off the clock, most courts will side with workers.

Similarly, it is up to the employer to maintain records of the time spent by employees performing work activities. If an employer does not have these records, the employee is entitled to recover based on good faith, reasonable estimates.

Regarding “failure to ask,” that is not a recognized defense for employers. You don’t have to repeatedly ask for overtime if you know your employer won’t pay.

If you believe you are being denied overtime, give us a call. Simply because your employer says you are not eligible for overtime doesn’t mean what you are being told is true.

We welcome FLSA cases on a contingent fee basis meaning you owe us nothing unless we first win your case and recover money on your behalf. For more information, contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone (202) 800-9791. You can also visit our Federal Labor Law Overtime page.

All inquiries protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept confidential.

MahanyLaw – America’s Wage Theft Lawyers. Protecting Timeshare and Mortgage Company Workers

The post Timeshare Workers Eligible for Overtime (Wage Theft Post) appeared first on Mahany Law.

Attention Present and Former Knight Enterprises Cable Installers – You May Be Entitled to Overtime Pay

Knight Enterprises is a full service installer of cable, internet and wireline phone systems. They handle both residential and commercial installations. They claim to be one of the largest, privately owned “communications infrastructure providers in North America”. Unfortunately, we believed they got there by exploiting their workforce.

For years, the company has had a checkered past with its employees. For many, that meant wrongly classifying installers as independent contractors. Companies often do that to avoid minimum wage and overtime rules.

In 2009, two Knight Enterprises installers filed an overtime lawsuit against the company. Michael Scantland and Daniel Lawrence sued the company under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. That law requires employers to pay their workers minimum wage and time and one half for all hours over 40 worked during a 7 day period.

The two men filed their lawsuit as class or collective action. That means it was filed on behalf of all installers in Florida. A judge tossed their claim after finding they were independent contractors.

The men appealed. In 2013, a three judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals reversed and ruled in favor of the installers.

Knight Enterprises Loses Federal Appeals Court Decision

Although the trial judge tossed their claims, the two technicians didn’t give up.

A three judge appeals court decided the appeal in 2013. The court first discussed the Fair Labor Standards Act. Passed during the Great Depression, the Act or FLSA as it is sometimes called was Congress’ response to businesses who were exploited desperate workers in the wake of Depression.

The Act requires businesses to pay minimum wages and for most workers, premium pay (time and one half) for all hours worked over 40 hours in a week. The law applies to employees but not independent contractors.

It is isn’t surprising that many businesses try to classify workers as contractors to avoid benefits, Family Medical Leave, health insurance and overtime.

Adding to the confusion, the legal definition of an “employee” varies between agencies. The IRS test is different from the Department of Labor (unemployment) which is different from the FLSA test. For our purposes, we will just consider the definition of “employ” for overtime purposes.

To determine whether a worker falls into the category of “employee” or “independent contractor,” courts use an “economic reality test. The 11^th Circuit Court of Appeals in examining the Knight Enterprises case specifically noted, “The inquiry is not governed by the label put on the relationship” by the employer. Instead it focuses on the actual work done by the worker and who controls that work.

That means your boss or contractor agreement doesn’t determine whether you are an employee entitled to overtime pay.

Six Factor Economic Reality Test (Independent Contractor vs Employee)

Courts generally look at six factors when determining whether a worker is an employee or contractor. Those factors are:

• the nature and degree of the employer’s control as to the manner in which the work is performed
• the worker’s opportunity for profit or loss
• the worker’s investment in equipment or materials
• whether the service rendered requires a special skill
• the degree of permanency and duration of the working relationship
• the extent to which the service rendered is an integral part of the employer’s business

No one factor is controlling nor does a worker have to meet every test in order to be deemed an employee entitled to overtime.

In the Knight Enterprises case, the court found that the company exercised significant control over the workers. They set their hours and order in which they performed installations. The installers would also have to report to a Knight facility each morning to get equipment for that day and return any equipment from the prior day.

On paper, a technician could refuse a specific job because it was far away or unprofitable but in reality, they would be terminated or just not receive further assignments. In other words, if you wanted work, you did everything you were told by Knight Enterprises.

Another factor weighing in for the workers was Knight’s requirement that installers could not work for other companies.

Workers were also “levied uncontestable fines called ‘chargebacks’ for not meeting specifications.” Normally the remedy for a contractor not getting the job done properly is actual damages. The fine system showed just how much control Knight exercised over its supposedly “independent” technicians.

Unfortunately for the technicians, they were consistently required to work 6 or 7 days a week and more than 40 hours during that week. And they didn’t get overtime.

They also could not negotiate prices for jobs.

Because they could not negotiate prices for their work, the court determined that there was little opportunity for profit or loss. It didn’t matter how good you were, compensation was based on how many jobs you did.

Next the court looked at the worker’s investment in tools and equipment. The court found that was a wash. The evidence didn’t help the employer or the worker.

As to the duration and permanency of the relationship, once again the court sided with the installers. The “independent contractor” agreements were for terms of years and not for each job. They also renewed automatically.

Another factor weighing in favor of employee classification was that he relationship was that the contractors could not work for anyone else.

In the end, the court ruled that the installers were employees and not contractors.

Class Action or Individual Claim?

Knight Enterprises does business in several southern states. The federal appeals court noted they employ 100’s of installers.

Normally wage theft claims are handled in court through a class action. It is much easier to find a lawyer to take 100 cases with the same facts than it is to one willing to take a single case. Employers know this and have made much more difficult for workers to get properly paid.

Greedy employers get away without not paying workers by placing “class action waivers” and arbitration clauses in their subcontracting agreements. In other words, not only do they lie to workers and claim that they are not employees, they also forbid them from filing lawsuits or participating in a class action lawsuit.

The Knight Enterprises agreement we have seen has an arbitration clause that says,

“It is the desire of the parties that any controversy or claim of any nature, arising out of or in any way related to any Dispute shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration in Tampa, Florida, in accordance with the Commercial Law Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association.”

Knight Enterprises was savvy enough to know they can’t stop an installer from filing a complaint with the EEOC or Department of Labor. In an incredibly selfish move, however, they precluded the aggrieved worker from collecting any damages. In other words, you can’t contract away your rights to report illegal behavior to the authorities but you can waive your right to receive damages.

Companies know that nobody would contact the authorities if they knew they couldn’t collect any money even if they won!

Not only must installers arbitrate claims, they give up their right to a jury.

Their class action arbitration clause is equally insidious. It says,

“Any claim must be brought in the respective party’s individual capacity and not as a plaintiff or class member in any purported class [action].

Does this mean installers and technicians working for Knight Enterprises are out-of-luck? Of course not. Workers can still arbitrate their claims against the company. While we prefer litigating these cases in court and in front of a jury, it is still possible for the average Joe to win.

MahanyLaw is Actively Seeking Knight Enterprises Installers and Technicians

Knight Enterprises was successfully sued by installers. Instead of cleaning up their act and treating workers better, they apparently redrafted their contracts to better escape taking responsibility for their wrongdoing.

What can you do? Plenty! We are actively looking for active and recently separated Knight Enterprises workers who believe they did not receive proper overtime.

We take individual wage theft cases, even if they must be arbitrated. Whether in a courthouse or a mediation room, FLSA provided that workers successfully making a claim are eligible for double back pay, future pay and attorney’s fee too.

We never charge for our services unless we win. If you don’t win and recover money, you owe us nothing.

You work hard at your job. Don’t let a greedy employer lie about your independent contractor status. Remember, your proper classification has nothing to do with your title. Simply because your boss tells you that you are exempt from overtime does not mean it is true.

Looking for more information? Visit our FLSA wage theft page or our blog post on cable installers. Ready to see if you have a case? Contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731.

All calls protected by the attorney client privilege and kept strictly confidential.

The post Knight Enterprises Cable Installers Overtime Claim Center appeared first on Mahany Law.

Wells Fargo Announces More Layoffs – Perfect Whistleblower Opportunity?

Wells Fargo, America’s embattled 4^th largest bank, announced that it is “releasing” 638 mortgage workers. Most of the people being let go are mortgage loan servicers and fulfillment professionals. The layoffs are part of a much larger reduction in force.

Wells Fargo is under an asset cap levied by the Federal Reserve. The highly unusual sanction came after repeated fines failed to properly get the attention of the rogue banking giant. As we have often said on these pages, America’s “Too Big to Fail” banks view fines as a cost of doing business. Rip off taxpayers and customers for as long as you can and when finally caught, pay a fine, say I am sorry and think of a new scheme.

In January of this year the Federal Reserve drastically upped the ante. Outgoing Fed chair Janet Yellen imposed a rare sanction against a bank, she capped the bank’s asset base for 2 years. While the economy is booming and other banks are growing, the Fed gave Wells Fargo a time out.

So, what is the bank’s response? If they were forced to stand in the corner and not grow for two years institutional investors wouldn’t be happy. If you can’t grow your base then simply cut expenses. According to Reuters, “Wells Fargo has vowed to cut $4 billion in costs by 2020 in order to grow profits.”

And how do you cut costs? Fire your workforce, of course.

We have no love for Wells Fargo or most other big banks. The way to fix them, however, is to cut off the head of the bank, the diseased senior managers and directors who reward bad behavior.

Admittedly in light of the recent scandal involving opening unauthorized accounts, and then charging unsuspecting customers fees for those accounts, the board booted then CEO John Stumpf. He also had to disgorge part of his ridiculous golden parachute and bonus money.

Now that the spotlight is off the bank, however, Wells Fargo is back to doing what it does best. Punishing rank and file workers.

The bank rightfully claims that mortgage revenues are down. That is true, many members of the public stopped banking at Wells Fargo since they simply could no longer trust the bank. Instead of cutting profits, bloated management salaries or giving less to shareholders, however, the bank decided to “release” rank and file bank workers. This time mortgage servicers and mortgage fulfillment specialists.

In an official statement, a bank spokesperson said 638 Wells Fargo mortgage workers will be let go. These folks are primarily employed in Orlando, Florida; Ranch Cordova, California; Colorado Springs, Colorado, and Charlotte, North Carolina.

How does the bank justify the firings? The bank says, “After carefully evaluating market conditions and consumer needs, we are reducing to better align with current volumes.”

Call for Wells Fargo Whistleblowers

We sincerely hope the stigma working for Wells Fargo doesn’t hurt any of the 638 mortgage workers suddenly out on the street. In a bit of additional cruelty, the layoffs will come just before Thanksgiving. We suspect that current CEO Timothy Sloan will be enjoying his turkey dinner (and $17.4 million salary) while hundreds of his former employees are struggling to feed their families.

Obviously we are angry at the latest actions by the bank. But anger doesn’t solve anything.

So, what can be done? Plenty!

First, let’s recap the scandals in just the last two years.

In September of 2016, the fake account scandal exploded. Millions of fake accounts foisted on unsuspecting customers. Often with fees. The late charges and new balances caused many folks to suffer negative credit ratings, something that can hurt them for years. Bad credit scores are also something beyond Wells Fargo’s direct ability to fix.

The bank paid a $185 million fine, settled countless lawsuits and 5,300 workers were fired. Included in that aftermath was CEO John Stumpf’s sudden retirement. In addition to losing his bonus, he also had to forfeit $41 million in stock awards.

That same month Wells Fargo admits that it illegally repossessed cars. It was caught taking cars without a court order. Cars of our soldiers who were actively deployed and defending our country. The bank wrote a $24 million check and had to pay for a bunch of cars to replace the ones illegally seized.

In January 2017, the bank admits that there were “signs” that it may have retaliated against bank whistleblowers who originally stepped forward and reported the phony account scandal. (More on that below.)

In April, as the SEC now investigated the fake account scandal and as political pressure mounted, Stumpf agrees to give back another $28 million. The board also admits that it had warnings about the fake accounts as early as 2004.

In June a class action lawsuit dropped another bombshell. Wells Fargo was accused of modifying mortgages without permission of the borrowers. That meant some customers were paying more than they should. The bank strongly denied the allegations and called them scandalous.

In July, the bank admits it charged over 550,000 car buyers for insurance they didn’t need. Extra insurance, of course, means that it is harder to keep current with payments. An estimated 20,000 borrowers defaulted because of the added payments. (The New York Times suggested the amount of car buyers affected by unneeded insurance was much higher.)

Instead of their normal apology, this time the bank said it was “extremely sorry.”

In fact, the bank was so sorry that it said it agreed to pay $80,000,000 to those affected. That sounds like a lot of money until you figure that between 570,000 and 800,000 people were affected. That works out to between $100 and $140 per victim.

If you had your car repossessed, the bank offered an average of just $800.

Two weeks later, the bank was sued for overcharging small businesses for credit card transactions.

Just when things couldn’t get any worse for the bank, they did. An estimated 1.4 million phony accounts surfaced in September.

In October of last year, the bank admitted it wrongfully assessed 110,000 mortgage borrowers for missing deadlines they didn’t actually miss! Those charges came to light because of four Wells Fargo whistleblowers. In typical corporate double speak, the bank admitted that its mortgage policies were “at times not consistently applied” and that it was “primarily responsible” for the penalties.

The bank promised to pay refunds (did it have a choice?) as part of its efforts to “rebuild trust” with customers.

In October, it was also the brokerage arm of Wells Fargo that was in trouble. This time for selling customers’ investments that were “highly likely to lose value.” The bank didn’t apologize this time, in fact it was allowed to simply pay more money without any admission of wrongdoing.

In November Wells Fargo was in trouble again for illegally repossessing cars once again belonging to servicemen and women. More refunds, more fines and more efforts at “rebuilding trust.”

Already this year the bank has been accused by the City of Sacramento of illegal lending practices in minority communities. (The bank denies those claims.)

The bank recently was accused that it “illegally altered its customers’ documents.” That includes social security numbers. In an absolutely weird explanation, Wells Fargo did the proverbial “yeah but” excuse common to five year olds. The bank said, “No customers were negatively impacted, no data left the company and no products or services were sold as a result.”

Apparently as long as you don’t create fake accounts you can alter customer account records.

The bank was also ordered to pay $97 million for labor law violations*

[*MahanyLaw is part of the claim on behalf of Wells Fargo bankers alleging they were not properly paid overtime.]

So why are we seeking Wells Fargo whistleblowers? The answer should be obvious! We think that there are plenty more skeletons in the bank’s closet. And unfortunately, since the bank isn’t allowed to grow, it will likely seek new revenue streams by engaging in questionable conduct and by cutting more workers. They will then likely push their fewer number of employees to work longer hours.

Under the federal False Claims Act, whistleblowers who report fraud involving government funds – here that would be residential mortgages – to cash rewards of between 15% and 30% of whatever fines are levied. In Wells Fargo case, that probably means huge fines (and therefore huge awards).

Wells Fargo whistleblowers who report bank misconduct – and there is no shortage of that at the bank – can earn a $1.6 million award for their information through the FIRREA program.

And the SEC whistleblower reward program covers a wide variety of banking misconduct. Like the False Claims Act program, there are no caps on awards from the SEC.

Are these rewards real? Yes! Our bank whistleblowers have already received over 100 million dollars in award monies.

Whether or not you still have your job or were laid off, we are hoping that more Wells Fargo whistleblowers will step forward. Front line employees and middle managers are in the best position to rein in the bank.

Regulators can’t act without your information.

Becoming a whistleblower is the right thing to do and may put a huge check in your purse. As Wells Fargo has already learned (the hard way), retaliating against whistleblowers doesn’t work either. And that carries even more damages and legal fees too.

If you have inside information about illegal behavior and are interested in joining the ranks of other successful Wells Fargo whistleblowers, give us a call. We will help you evaluate your information so that you can make an informed decision.

All inquiries are completely confidential and protected by the attorney – client privilege. There is never any obligation and you don’t pay for our services unless we recover money for you. In the last 5 years we have helped bank whistleblowers recover over $100 million in rewards. You could be next.

For more information, contact us online by email *protected email* or by phone 414-704-6731. Not ready to call? We have plenty of information about the False Claims Act, SEC and FIRREA bank whistleblower programs online.

Wells Fargo Overtime Claims

Wells Fargo and other big banks have a history of not properly paying their workers. Mortgage originators, front line managers and private bankers are particularly at risk. Many claims have already been pursued against Wells Fargo but that doesn’t mean there isn’t another group of employees not being properly paid overtime.

The federal Fair Labor Standards Act says most workers are entitled to be paid time and one half for any hours over 40 worked in a seven day period. Some banks will wrongfully tell workers they are exempt from overtime because they are “managers” / commissioned sales staff / professionals / salaried or “exempt.” There are exemptions, of course, but frequently they don’t apply. Simply because your boss or HR says you don’t qualify for overtime doesn’t mean it is true.

We also see cases where bankers who take calls after hours or who must stay late to finish paperwork don’t get properly compensated.

Is that you? Let one of our employment lawyers or network help you determine whether you qualify for overtime pay.

Worried about the cost? Don’t. The Fair Labor Standards Act requires the employer to pay double damages and attorneys’ fees.

For more information, visit our wage theft information page or just give us a call. You can contact us online by email *protected email* or by phone 414-704-6731.

Why MahanyLaw?

Why should Wells Fargo whistleblowers or bankers contact us? Great question.

First, we don’t represent banks. We represent individual bankers who wish to blow the whistle on corporate greed and corruption or who believe they have been underpaid.

Second, we have brought our bank whistleblower clients over $100 million in rewards. We are also part of the recent $97 million Wells Fargo wage theft case.

Third, these cases are what we live for. There is nothing wrong with a lawyer making money or a whistleblower receiving an award. What makes us effective, however, is our drive and team. A team that includes the former enforcement chief from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, SEC investigations chief, FDIC enforcement chief, state revenue commissioner and career prosecutors.

We come together as one team to fight corruption and to protect bankers who bravely speak up. We would love to help you.

The fine print: When you call us, never use a work email, work computer or contact while at work. And remember, most award programs only pay the first to file. If you are thinking about filing for a reward, don’t wait too long.

The post Wells Fargo Whistleblowers Post – Bank Announces More Layoffs appeared first on Mahany Law.

Help for Cancer Victims Previously Exposed to Roundup & Monsanto Whistleblower Insiders

Earlier this month a California jury socked Monsanto with a $289 million verdict after finding the company’s Roundup and Ranger Pro herbicides contributed to or caused a groundskeeper to develop cancer. The company has denied the link between its popular weed killers and cancer for years.

Since the record verdict, many more lawsuits have been filed. Law360 reported today that Monsanto faces 8,000 lawsuits over its glyphosate based weed killers. Monsanto is owned by Bayer AG.

Overnight, the victory has created a cottage industry of products liability law firms hoping to educate the public over the dangers of Monsanto Roundup and to sign up clients who may be suffering from the effects of exposure to these dangerous products.

We are looking for something a bit different. We are looking for a corporate insider, a Monsanto whistleblower. *

*[Like many quality products liability firms, we are always looking for victims. See below for more information about victims – people exposed to glyphosate Roundup and Ranger Pro and who are now suffering from lymphoma, myeloma or leukemia.]

Why a Monsanto whistleblower? Because companies lie. Whether you call it a lie or engage in corporate doublespeak and call it an omission, we think that say that many big companies lie.

Monsanto says the safety of Roundup is backed by “hundreds of studies.” In an investor call this week, Bayer AG CEO Werner Baumann said, “We will be arguing that the evidence and the law do not support the liability finding nor the damage awards.” The US EPA appears to agree with him.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization (“WHO”), disagrees, however, as do many European and South American countries.

A 1994 WHO monograph found that glyphosate was probably safe for humans when used as directed. Later in 2015, however, WHO said,

Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide. Several epidemiological studies on cancer outcomes following occupational exposure to glyphosate were available. The evaluation of these studies focused on the occurrence of NHL [non-Hodgkin lymphoma]. Overall, there is some evidence of a positive association between glyphosate exposure and risk of NHL from the case–control studies and the overall meta-analysis.

Consumption of glyphosate from human dietary exposure was deemed safe. This would most likely occur from eating vegetables or fruit with minute amounts of residual spray. But can Roundup be absorbed through the skin? How toxic is it then?

DeWayne “Lee” Johnson, the victim slated to receive $289 million, suffers from lymphoma (cancer). At trial he testified that as a groundskeeper, he sprayed 150 gallons of Ranger Pro per day on several school campuses 20 to 30 days per year. At times he was covered in it, something that can easily happen on a breezy day.

Johnson also testified that when he attended an optional safety course, he was told that Ranger Pro was safe enough to drink.

A number of competing experts testified in the trial. One of DeWayne Johnson’s expert was a National Institutes for Health scientist. In the end, jurors believed Johnson’s experts over those hired by Monsanto.

We anticipate that Monsanto is not going down without more of a fight. Companies losing large jury verdicts typically try to attack both the finding on liability and the award. Assuming an appeals court upholds the verdict, Monsanto will likely go to the Supreme Court. And at the same time, they will attack the size of the award. In this case, that award was $39.5 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages.

Sadly, this means DeWayne Johnson may not see a penny of the recovery. Although we think he will win the appeals, the cancer may have killed him before the case is over. And the bills from his cancer treatment could leave him and his family penniless.

DeWayne is 44.

More about Johnson’s case below. First, let’s discuss why we are looking for a Monsanto whistleblower and what we can do for victims of exposure to RoundUp and Ranger Pro.

Monsanto Whistleblower & RoundUp Victims Information

Seeking Monsanto Whistleblower

Let’s start with Monsanto whistleblower information and then move to victim compensation. (If you are a victim, you should still read this section.)

Unlike many law firms that rely on discovery and detective work to prove their cases, we go one step beyond. We seek company whistleblowers. As a whistleblower law firm, we have become quite adept at finding insiders.

Believe it or not, most companies are filled with honest, hardworking people who want to do the right thing. That isn’t always easy. Some companies deter whistleblowers by demoting or even firing them. And a few really bad apples actually sue whistleblowers on trumped up charges of trade secret theft or violating company privacy policies.

Really what these companies are doing are trying to deter other would be whistleblowers. They want to make an example out of whistleblowers so that everyone in the company becomes too afraid to step forward.

Sooner or later, truth has a way of coming out.

Some of the biggest prosecutions in US history started because of a brave whistleblower. Our $16.67 billion recovery against Bank of America? That case started because of three brave whistleblowers… A former executive of Fannie Mae, a Bank of America senior vice president and a front line real estate appraiser. None of the three knew one another but they all knew something was very wrong, all had a tremendous sense of right and wrong and all came to the table with a piece of the puzzle.

Sometimes we can help our whistleblowers obtain a cash award for their information. That is probably not the case with Monsanto, however. Unfortunately, although many federal laws have anti-retaliation provisions, but most do not pay whistleblower rewards. That means we can help protect whistleblowers from retaliation although there may not be a law that allows the whistleblower to also earn a separate cash reward.

We are one of the largest whistleblower law firms in the country, if there is an available award, we will find it.

So, if there may not be any awards, why come forward? The answer is simple. We represent both corporate whistleblowers and victims of corporate greed. Even if we can’t obtain an award, your information may be valuable to dozens or hundreds or thousands of victims.

Most law firms take depositions and subpoena documents hoping to find the smoking gun email. Unfortunately, many big companies do everything to make sure those smoking guns are deeply buried or destroyed. Someone, however, somewhere usually has a copy or a story to tell.

Finding that person through the traditional lawsuit process is like finding a needle in a haystack. But we do things differently by beginning our cases on the inside whenever possible.

If we can’t get you an award, we may still be able to still use your information – confidentially – to help others in need. DeWayne Johnson is one of 8,000 people claiming their lives were ruined by glyphosate. Did Monsanto know this chemical was carcinogenic? Did they suspect it?

Someone knows the answer.

Coming forward may save lives, is the right thing to do and will insure that you made a difference to society as a whole and to a family suffering because a member of that family has lymphoma or myeloma or leukemia.

If you have information about glyphosate or any other dangerous products, call us. Confidentiality assured. All inquiries protected by the attorney – client privilege.

To learn more contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct).  Never call from a work phone or email using is a work computer or email account

Cancer Victim with Prior Exposure to RoundUp?

If you believe you have suffered serious health effects from using a pesticide or herbicide, contact us immediately. We believe many of these products are far more dangerous than people think. They can kill you even if you follow application instructions.

Despite Monsanto’s claims to the contrary, some experts believe that the glyphosate used in Round Up and. Ranger Pro is carcinogenic. There is a suspected link between the chemical and myeloma, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia.

Companies like Monsanto can he held liable for injuries and damages attributable to bad or unsafe products. That includes being responsible for products with improper warning labels or instructions.

If we prove your case against Monsanto, you can collect damages. Damages include:

• Medical bills
• Future anticipated medical bills
• Pain and suffering
• Medical Monitoring
• Lost wages including future lost wages
• And in some cases, punitive damages

To learn more contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct).

Monsanto RoundUp and Glyphosate – The Rest of the Story

News media was quick to report on DeWayne Johnson’s epic win against Monsanto but few journalists went digging through the weeds (poor pun intended) to ferret out some of the fascinating highlights of DeWayne Johnson’s case and the history of glyphosate.

This story is based on court records. Although Monsanto denied many of the allegations in the case, the jury sided with Johnson.

Monsanto is the leading producer of glyphosate in the world. That may be why the company is so interested in fighting claims about the product.

If glyphosate is broad spectrum that kills plants, Monsanto’s Roundup Ready seeds is equally big business. Monsanto seeds are engineered to resist the glyphosate. That means farmers can spray the chemical directly on their product. The weeds will die but the crops remain safe.

The combination of Roundup and roundup resistant crop seeds has helped Monsanto grow into a multibillion business.

By 2010, 70% of the corn crops and 90% of soy crops in the United States were Roundup Ready.

Glyphosate was developed by a Monsanto scientist named John Franz in 1970. Within a few years it was being sold as safe and super effective against weeds.

By 1985, the US Environmental Protection Agency was considering classifying glyphosate as carcinogenic. Monsanto balked and instead pressured the agency and flooded them with contrary studies suggesting the product was safe. The EPA backed down. To this day they don’t label glyphosate as carcinogenic.

But two of the labs that did the work for Monsanto were accused of fraud. So just how dangerous is Roundup and what does Monsanto know?

While EPA Sides with Monsanto, Others Act

If the EPA wouldn’t act, however, some states began to question the safety of glyphosate.

In 1996, New York State sued Monsanto over its Roundup marketing claims. Specifically, the state was concerned about Monsanto’s claims that Roundup was as safe as table salt.

The company also said glyphosate’s safety margin is far greater than required. It has over a 1,000 fold safety margin over food. Another ad said, “Roundup can be used where kids and pets will play.”

Without admitting any wrongdoing, the company agreed to stop make such claims about its glyphosate products but only in New York state.

In 2009, a French court ruled that Monsanto made misleading statements about Roundup in France.

Roundup is Monsanto’s most profitable product. We expect the company will fight at any cost to keep selling its products in the United States. Like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, Monsanto keeps telling US consumers that the product is safe even while other countries such as the Netherlands, France, Columbia, Sri Lanka, Bermuda and Brazil are trying to ban or have banned its use in those countries.

Despite 8000 lawsuits, we are aware of no smoking gun. Yet.

Assuming there is a smoking gun, it will most likely be a scientist working for Monsanto or someone who worked at one of the two outside labs used by Monsanto that were accused of fraud, Industrial Bio-Test Industries and Craven Laboratories.

We are looking for actual studies showing the dangers of glyphosate and proof that Monsanto possessed those studies or information.

Summary – Seeking Roundup Cancer Victims and Monsanto Whistleblower

We are actively seeking a Monsanto whistleblower as well as people who may have been exposed to Roundup, Ranger Pro or other Monsanto glyphosate products and later developed certain type cancers.

If you are a former or present employee of Monsanto or one of its labs and have inside information about the dangers of glyphosate and wish to become a Monsanto whistleblower, call us. All inquiries are confidential. We desperately need information – or even where to look – about the dangers of Roundup and Ranger Pro.

If you or a loved has cancer Lymphoma, non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, Myeloma, or Leukemia and have a history of exposure to Roundup at home or at work, you may be entitled to substantial damages. Our case review is free and without obligation. If we take your case, we never charge attorneys’ fees unless we win and you receive compensation.  

All inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept completely confidential.

For more information, contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct).

The post Seeking Monsanto Whistleblower & Roundup Cancer Lawsuits appeared first on Mahany Law.

MahanyLaw is investigating a patient report that Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care is committing Medicare fraud. Under the federal False Claims Act, people with inside information about healthcare fraud involving tax dollars may be entitled to significant cash rewards for their information. The term “inside information” generally means a current or former employee of the wrongdoer.  Although patients are usually correct in their observations of fraud, they typically do not have enough information to establish a “pattern and practice” of fraud.

According to the company’s website, “Seasons Hospice is a community-based organization with an ongoing mission to find creative solutions that add quality to end-of-life care. The caregivers at Seasons Hospice hold steadfast to the patient/family focus of hospice care.”

From reading reviews on the employee rating website, most Seasons Hospice staff give the company high marks for quality of care. Our beef, however, is that they are reportedly ripping off Medicare, Medicaid and private healthcare insurance.

When someone steals from Medicare or overcharges, everyone suffers. Because Medicare and Medicaid are funded with tax dollars, our taxes go up when healthcare providers overcharge. Same with private medical insurance.  Increased charges mean higher health insurance rates. With so many families struggling to afford insurance, we have no tolerance of providers that try to cheat the system.

What We Know about Seasons Hospice

Our information suggests that Seasons Hospice provides services to patients who do not qualify for hospice care. Hospice is designated for people who require end of life care. Obviously it is impossible to accurately predict how long someone may live. The median stay for hospice patients is roughly three weeks, although the average length of stay is higher because roughly 12% of patients remain in hospice care for 6 months or longer.

We often find Medicare fraud in hospices that have a high percentage of long term patients. If our information is correct, Seasons Hospice has patients that remain for years.

We have also been told that Seasons Hospice will falsely report that a patient is receiving wound care to extend the length of their stay.

Finally we are told that patients will be billed for physician visits and other services that were never provided. Because patients in hospices are usually at the end of their life, prosecuting a case based on patient claims is difficult. Putting it bluntly, our witness is not likely to survive until trial. That is why we need a present or former patient to verify the information we have received.

According to the company’s website, Seasons Hospice operates facilities in Arizona, Oregon, Nevada, California, Florida, Illinois, Texas, Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Missouri, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Connecticut and Massachusetts.

Hospice Care and Medicare / Medicaid Fraud

The Justice Department and the Inspector General’s Office of Health and Human Services have been involved in many recent Medicare fraud prosecutions of hospices… Vitas Hospice Services LLC (2017 – $75 million), Haven Hospice (2017 – $5 million), Hospice Compassus (2018 – $3.9 million), Horizons Hospice (2018 – $1.240 million), and Home Care Hospice Inc (2018 – pending)

Like most private insurance, Medicare and Medicaid pay for hospice services. A patient is eligible if he or she is terminally ill. Generally that means a physician has certified that the patient has a medical prognosis of six months or less assuming the individual’s illness runs its normal course.

Hospice services are reimbursed on a per diem basis. That means the longer the patient stays, the more money received by the hospice provider. Since the patients are already at the end of their life, one way for a provider to game the system is to bring patients in earlier. In other words, before they qualify or meet eligibility requirements. We think that is what we are being told about Seasons Hospice.

Medicare offers four levels of per diem payment depending on the level of care provided. The lowest level of payment is for “routine care,” while the highest level of payment is reserved for “crisis care.” Another way of gaming the system is to bill for a higher levels of care than what is actually being provided.

We are looking for evidence that Seasons Hospice overbilled for crisis care, provided routine care while billing for a higher level of care or provided higher levels of care than were medically necessary. All of these are common Medicare fraud schemes. (As noted earlier, our information is limited, hence our investigation.)

We are also looking for evidence that Seasons Hospice is providing services to ineligible patients.

As an analogy, let’s look at the recent prosecution of Vitas. According to the government, Vitas overbilled Medicare for crisis care services with knowledge that such payment claims were false because the patients did not need crisis care. These patients should have received routine care paid at the lower per diem rate. In addition, the government alleged, some patients did not qualify for any level of hospice care because they did not have a life expectancy of six months or less. Moreover, the government alleged that publicly available data demonstrated that Vitas was billing Medicare for substantially more crisis care as compared to its peers.

In other hospice Medicare fraud cases we have observed, providers pressured sales staff to admit more patients and pressured clinical staff to maximize utilization. Altering medical records is a common method of getting patients falsely “qualified” for care.

Instead of doing what is best for the patients, some hospices are motivated by greed.

Seeking Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care Whistleblowers

As one of the most successful whistleblowing law firms in the nation, we are constantly on the lookout for fraud and corporate greed. Particularly in the healthcare field.

Many folks believe that Medicare fraud is a victimless crime. It isn’t. Taxpayers across the United States suffer. With an estimated 10% of healthcare spending being lost to waste and fraud, we are paying billions of dollars more each than is necessary. That pushes up taxes and medical costs.

There is also the issue of patient care. We observed in one skilled nursing facility case a provider that was forcing very elderly patients to undergo strenuous and painful physical therapy. Making an elderly person suffer needlessly at the end of their life is cruel. It is one thing to help an elderly person regain their independence. It is quite another to force a dying man to undergo daily PT simply so as to increase billings and profits.

Under the False Claims Act (29 states have similar laws for state funded Medicaid), insiders who are first to report and document these frauds are eligible to receive a cash reward of between 15% and 30% of what the government collects. Look at the recent Vitas case, that means an award of between $11,250,000 and $22,500,000!

Qualifying for an award means filing a sealed lawsuit in federal court. While the case is being investigated your name typically remains anonymous. Once the government concludes its investigation it can take over the prosecution, allow your lawyers to prosecute or ask the court to dismiss the case.

We handle all aspects of the prosecution and you never have to pay us any money unless we win. Our whistleblower clients have received over $100,000,000.00 in recent years.

To learn more, visit our hospice care fraud information page. Have questions or ready to help stop healthcare fraud? Contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at (414) 704-6731 (direct). All inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and remain confidential.

Bonus Awards for Illinois and California Seasons Healthcare Whistleblowers

California and Illinois have passed private insurance whistleblower laws. If you have information about Seasons Hospice defrauding private insurance companies, you may eligible for a separate reward from each of those states. Do you have information that will assist our investigation? Call us today.

The post Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care – Fraud Investigation appeared first on Mahany Law.

[Ed. Note: This is another post in our continuing coverage of this month’s $289 million jury verdict against Monsanto, maker of Round Up and Ranger Pro herbicides. We urge everyone to read our cornerstone post with specific information for Round Up cancer victims and Monsanto whistleblowers.]

Companies that manufacture herbicides spend millions of dollars in testing. Much of the testing, of course, is to make sure the product works. Farmers, landscapers and home owners don’t want a weed killer that doesn’t kill weeds. There is much more testing, however, that goes on beyond the scenes to make sure that herbicides are safe for livestock, pets and humans.

Common sense tells us to be careful when spraying herbicides and pesticides. Often the directions tell us to wear protective eye wear or gloves or to avoid allowing pets and kids play on treated lawns for several hours until the product is dry.

Monsanto, maker of the number one selling herbicides in the world – Ranger Pro and Roundup – claim that their products are as safe as table salt. DeWayne Johnson, now in the final end-of-life stages of cancer was told it was safe enough to drink.

So how safe is RoundUp? How much testing did Monsanto do? And did they cover up bad test results?

We already know that many European and South American countries ban or severely restrict the use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and Ranger Pro. We also that a California jury found that not only were these products responsible for DeWayne’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, they also found that Monsanto knew of or suspected the dangers. [See the link above for full details of DeWayne’s historic win.]

But what about the testing and did Monsanto actually know?

Willful Blindness and Monsanto

Did someone at Monsanto actually know just how bad glyphosate is? How dangerous it is? We may never know. Let me explain.

First, for the record, Monsanto continues to claim that Roundup is safe. They have vowed to appeal the jury verdict in California. For DeWayne, that means he will likely be dead and penniless before the appeals are complete. Hopefully his appeal will pave the way for other victims to be fairly compensated and will push the EPA to step in and act.

How many people must die before the agency acts?

The World Health Organization has already determined that glyphosate is dangerous and a probable carcinogen. Experts have linked it to leukemia, myeloma and lymphoma, all deadly cancers. A jury heard experts on both sides and found a link between Ranger Pro and cancer.

Even after Monsanto lost, after the lights in the court house were turned off and after the camera crews packed up their gear, Monsanto continues to stomp its feet like a little child and say, “not me, not me!”

The solution is easy, more testing. And to be safe, take Round Up off the shelves until that testing is done. That doesn’t appear to be happening.

Why is Monsanto afraid of more testing? That is where the concept of willful blindness comes in.

Think back to your early childhood. What did you do when you didn’t want to hear something, something like, “clean up your room”? Many of us tried sticking our fingers in our ears and shouting “La, La, La, La” as loud as we could.

We tried that a couple times until we realized it just didn’t work. That is “willful blindness.” In the corporate world, that means making sure you don’t see test results that might be negative. Because once you see them, it is much harder to deny.

But how can Monsanto deny experts – doctors and scientists – testifying that glyphosate causes cancer?

Some of the best investigative journalists work at Rolling Stone (yes, it’s true!). Rolling Stone’s Tessa Stuart covered the DeWayne Johnson’s trial against Monsanto. She picked up on some of the important findings missed by other coverage.

As early as 1983 the company should have known that glyphosate was dangerous. That is our opinion, of course, but jurors also believed there is a link between Roundup and cancer.

A study that year commissioned by the company found a statistically significant link between lab mice exposed to glyphosate and cancer. The EPA was very concerned but Monsanto was dismissive saying that one of the mice not exposed to glyphosate also developed cancer.

Of course. You can take 1000 mice and not expose any of them to anything and a few will develop cancer. The determining factor isn’t whether a single mouse not exposed to RoundUp develops cancer. The proper way of examining the results is to see if far more mice exposed to glyphosate develop cancer when compared to those that were not exposed.

The EPA had an easy solution, just do the test again. That didn’t work for Monsanto. (Remember the little boy with his fingers in his ears shouting La, La, La, La.)

According to the Rolling Stone, Monsanto fought the EPA for years over a single mouse. We suspect they spent at least 100 times more on lawyers and consultants instead of just repeating the test.

Why wouldn’t they repeat the test? In our opinion? They didn’t want to hear the answer.

When the World Health Organization declared that glyphosate was a probable carcinogen, internal emails at Monsanto show a frenzy of activity. Evidence at trial suggested that EPA’s Office of Pesticide Program scientists were siding with Monsanto.

Dan Jenkins, Monsanto’s regulatory affairs director, wrote to the deputy director of EPA’s Office of Pesticide Program and alerted him that the CDC (part of the Department of Health and Human Services) was planning on doing their own study. An email suggests that the deputy director at EPA told Jenkins, “If I can kill this, I should get a medal.”

Apparently, the study by CDC was never performed.

Why? Again, we think it is obvious. Monsanto doesn’t want to know the truth.

Monsanto and Labs Accused of Scientific Fraud

Like all chemical companies selling products for use by the public, Monsanto did extensive testing on its products both to assure effectiveness and safety. Two of the laboratories that did safety testing for Monsanto, were accused by regulators of fraud.

A company called Industrial Bio – Test Laboratories (IBT) did toxicology testing for Monsanto. An audit by the FDA found discrepancies between raw test data and the toxicology reports generated by IBT. Some of those studies involved Monsanto’s roundup product. Those tests were determined to be invalid.

IBT’s work was so sloppy that one lab technician apparently forgot high school sex education 101. An EPA investigator said, “[it’s]hard to believe the integrity of the studies when they [IBT] said they took specimens of the uterus from male rabbits.

Several IBT executives were later convicted of fraud.

A second testing company, Craven Laboratories, was also implicated in fraudulent scientific studies. Craven did testing to measure the effects of residuals on crops after being treated with Monsanto products.

The fraud was so bad that the EPA and Justice Department criminally prosecuted the lab’s owner, Don Craven, and several employees. At least one executive was sentenced to prison.

The company claims that it had all of the studies done by IBT and Craven Laboratories redone and retested.

A new lawsuit has now been filed accusing Monsanto of “scientific fraud”. Linda Dennis and her husband filed suit against Monsanto after Linda was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Linda says she used Roundup around her home to get rid of unwanted weeds.

She claims her cancer is the result of exposure to Roundup. She also says that Monsanto used “scientific fraud” to achieve “absolute market dominance” in the herbicide arena. They did that by marketing a dangerous product as safe and selling it without proper warning labels.

We hope that as that case winds its way through the courts we can learn more about Monsanto’s relationship with its lab partners.

The Risk of Glyphosate and Roundup Affects Everyone

If scientists are correct and there is a link between Roundup and cancer, virtually everyone is at risk.

The bulk of the pending lawsuits concern victims who say they contracted cancer through the application of Roundup or Ranger Pro. (Both Monsanto products are based on glyphosate.) DeWayne Johnson worked for a school district and regularly used a commercial sprayer to treat school grounds. Linda Dennis says she used roundup around her home. Both claim they came in direct contact with glyphosate through their spraying efforts.

But what about the rest of us? Monsanto’s patent for glyphosate was getting ready to expire in 2000. That is when the company began offering genetically altered crop seeds. The new genetically altered seeds were designed to resist Roundup.

Glyphosate is an extremely effective herbicide. It kills everything in its path (we would say that includes humans as well.) Farmers can’t spray Roundup on their crops to kill weeds because that would also kill the crops.

Enter GMO seeds. Monsanto created designer crops that resisted the glyphosate in Roundup. A farmer can now spray glyphosate directly on crops. These genetically engineered crops allow the poison in Roundup to kill the weeds but save the crops. (A recent NPR program claims that vineyards are losing grape vines because of airborne overspray from nearby farms that use Roundup. Grape vines are apparently very susceptible to even minute amounts of glyphosate. Roundup can be carried far and wide by wind.)

The problem with spraying Roundup on crops is that the product remains on the crop after the neighboring weeds die. How much glyphosate do we consume when we eat GMO Roundup Ready seeds? And is that consumption safe?

That exposure has not been litigated yet. But those cases are coming.

The prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association published a study last year indicating a tremendous increase of the presence of glyphosates in the bodies of residents of Southern California. Between 1993 – 1996 and 2014 – 2016 the amount of detectable glyphosate in the human bodies of the survey participants increased 13 times. Far more people were also found to have glyphosate in their body.

What does that mean? California last year declared that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen. People are now being exposed to more and more glyphosate. And that probably comes from dietary intake from GMO altered foods. Since farmers now spray Roundup on crops, it only follows that we will ingest these chemicals when we eat certain foods.

Call to Action – Cancer Victims Exposed to Roundup / Glyphosate

We think eventually Monsanto and its corporate parent Bayer AG will be forced to stop selling glyphosate based products such as RoundUp or Ranger Pro. Until that happens, the company is going to do everything in its power to place profits over people.

If scientists, the State of California and World Health Organization are correct, exposure to Roundup may cause certain cancers such as lymphoma, myeloma and leukemia. If you or a loved one suffers from any of these cancers and were exposed to Ranger Pro or Roundup, you may have a claim for damages.

Makers of dangerous or defective products are responsible for injuries caused by their products. Damages can include medical bills, future medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering and sometimes, punitive damages.

Obviously, no amount of money can make up for the loss of one’s life. The only thing corporate America understands, however, is getting hit in the pocket. (Bayer CEO Werner Baumann reportedly earned $6.6 million last year. Reuters claims that Hugh Grant, former CEO of Monsanto, walked away with as much as $70 million from the sale to Bayer. He was earning $10 million per year prior to the sale.)

Why should executives make millions while families suffer from the ravages of cancer? Cancer linked to dangerous but profitable products.

If you are suffering leukemia, lymphoma or myeloma and were exposed to Roundup or Ranger Pro, contact us immediately. We and our partners handle glyphosate exposure cases on a contingent fee basis meaning there is no fee for our services unless we recover money for you. We urge you to visit our Round Up Claims Center information page and then call us. We can be reached online, by email *protected email* or by phone 414-704-6731 (direct).

Do you did you WORK for MONSANTO or one of its TESTING LABORATORIES? We hope to speak to as many insiders as possible. We won’t use your name or disclose your identity without your permission. We are seeking Monsanto whistleblowers to help us better understand what the company knew about the dangers of glyphosate and when it learned that information. Beyond helping individual victims of Roundup exposure, we also want to insure the government takes appropriate action. See our Monsanto whistleblower information page and then call us at the numbers above.

The post On the Trail of Monsanto, Roundup and Cancer appeared first on Mahany Law.

“Wells Fargo Poops on the Living Room Carpet Again”

The battle lines are drawn. Tim Sloan, the embattled CEO of Wells Fargo, is starting to feel the pressure of the bank’s repeated missteps. Although hired as CEO to clean up Wells Fargo’s dirty messes, we think Sloan is just another in a line of stooges trying to suppress the truth.

An article featured in the NY Post claims Bloomberg News reassigned the journalist assigned to cover Wells Fargo. What makes this story so interesting is that the request to squelch the reporter came from none other than Tim Sloan himself. That the target of a news story – Wells Fargo – can boss around a well-respected media outlet is astonishing.

If the story is accurate, Wells Fargo has enough juice to silence one of the largest business media outlets in the nation.

John Micklethwait, Bloomberg’s Editor-in Chief, allegedly succumbed to pressure from Sloan. The bank was upset by Bloomberg’s coverage of the bank. As a result, Bloomberg reassigned the reporter, Shahien Nasiripour, to cover a different beat.

Why would Bloomberg News give up its journalistic integrity? And why give in to one of the sleaziest banks in the country? Money, of course.

Wells Fargo is a big advertiser. Bloomberg is also a supplier of $20,000 a year information terminals. Bloomberg doesn’t want to lose Wells Fargo as a customer. Perhaps it would be better to say that Bloomberg doesn’t want to lose Wells Fargo’s money.

Is there more of a connection? The NY Post claims that Micklethwait “loves his dinners with banking people.”

Journalists are supposed to be impartial. We suspect that if the Post story is true, morale must be rock bottom at Bloomberg.

Probably the only place with worse morale is Wells Fargo!

With an endless stream of scandals, we wonder why Sloan is attacking reporters instead of cleaning up the bank. If he can’t do it, whistleblowers will.

Call for Wells Fargo Whistleblowers

We have repeatedly called for insiders at Wells Fargo and other banks to step forward with information about greed, corruption and wrongdoing at banks. Money is power and unfortunately, power usually leads to greed and corruption.

The False Claims Act, the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act (FIRREA), the SEC and the IRS all have whistleblower reward programs that can pay large cash rewards for inside information about bank fraud or misconduct.

Tomorrow somewhere in the nation will be another headline about misbehavior by a bank. Regulators can’t be everywhere and don’t always know where to look for misconduct. That is why whistleblower tips are so important and why Congress has authorized a plethora of government agencies to pay cash awards for inside information.

There is a perception that regulators are largely in the pocket of big banks. Many believe that banks have become so powerful that they have truly become “too big to fail.”

Unfortunately, there may be a bit of truth in that. The NY Post story certainly doesn’t help the perceptions about the power of banks.

Even if these perceptions are true, however, Wells Fargo is still like the bad dog that pooped once too many times on the living room carpet. With the possible exception of a “bank obsessed” news editor, most folks have long had their fill of Wells Fargo.

Even the Federal Reserve has had enough. Outgoing Fed chair Janet Yellen imposed the ultimate sanction on Wells Fargo, an asset freeze. Although temporary, the signals to the bank can’t be stronger.

If there was ever a time to become a Wells Fargo whistleblower, today is the day.

[We remind would-be whistleblowers that there is a first to file requirement for most whistleblower programs, delaying may mean that someone beats you to a multi-million dollar award.]

If you are ready, call us. Even if you aren’t ready to become a whistleblower, we would still appreciate whatever information you might have that details misconduct. Even if we don’t want a reward or wish to remain anonymous, with your permission we might still be able to get the feds to act on your information or use the information to help borrowers and customers of the bank.

To learn more, visit our Wells Fargo whistleblower cornerstone pages [here] and [here]. We also urge you to call us. The author of this post, attorney Brian Mahany, has helped bank whistleblowers recover over $100 million in awards.

For more information, contact us online, by email at *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731. All inquiries are kept strictly confidential. The attorney – client privilege extends to all conversations even if you never hire us.

Our beef with Wells Fargo is their senior management, the c-suite mafia as we call them. It isn’t the rank and file workers, supervisors and middle managers.

If you think know of wrongdoing, call us. There is no obligation. And you might just sleep better knowing that you spoke with someone that understands. (One of our senior bank whistleblower lawyers was a whistleblower himself.)

Most whistleblowers try to fix problems internally. They speak with co-workers, then their supervisor and finally their boss’ boss. When that doesn’t work, they find us or go public.

Wells Fargo says they take employee concerns seriously but we believe they don’t. In many instances the only “thank you” you might get is a pink slip or demotion.

Others skip internal reporting either because they are fear retaliation or they think that such a call is futile. These folks often call a government agency right away. That may get you some protection from retaliation but it won’t get you a reward.

If you are ready to blow the whistle, want to understand your rights or just want to know if what the bank is doing is illegal, call us. We never charge for our services unless we are successful recovering money on your behalf.

Our contact information is above. We hope you call.

The post Wells Fargo Takes a Swing – at the Press (Whistleblower Post) appeared first on Mahany Law.

Appeals Court Approves Medical Necessity Case Alleging Unnecessary Cardiac Procedures

For most people, needing an invasive cardiac procedure may be the biggest medical ordeal of their life. We trust the surgeon we choose to make life or death decisions on our behalf. It is understood that whatever course of treatment he or she may select, it is medically necessary and in our best interests.

But what happens if the doctor is simply more interested in money? That is what a Utah physician is alleging in a recently unsealed False Claims Act case. Dr. Gerald Polukoff claims that a former colleague, Dr. Sherman Sorensen, was more interested in profits instead of his patients. He also accuses two Utah hospitals, St Mark’s and Intermountain Medical Center of turning a blind eye to the unnecessary surgeries.

According to his complaint, Sr. Polukoff claims that his former colleague, Sorensen, performed hundreds of medically unnecessary surgeries. The specific procedures at issues are Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) and/or Atrial Septal Defect (ASD) closures.

Complaint also Names Intermountain Medical Center, St. Mark’s Hospital and HCA

He says the hospitals are equally guilty. “Both hospital defendants allowed and encouraged Dr. Sorensen to perform and submit claims to federal health benefit programs for PFO and ASD procedures despite clear compliance red flags, including, but not limited to, the fact that Dr. Sorensen was performing these procedures at a rate that far exceeded that of any other institution or physician. Dr. Sorensen performed ASD and PFO procedures at a rate that dwarfed the rest of the country by a factor of ten-to-twenty fold, making him a true ‘outlier’. The Hospital Defendants ignored obvious warnings to halt these procedures so that they could secure and maintain a lucrative stream of profitable referrals.”

Intermountain Medical Center apparently got scared and stopped Sorensen from performing these procedures but only after the complaints of other medical staff “grew too loud to ignore.”

After Sorensen was suspended by Intermountain Medical Center, Dr. Polukoff says Sorensen packed up his practice and moved to St. Mark’s Hospital. There, his suspiciously high rate of invasive cardiac procedures began anew.

St. Mark’s Hospital is part of HCA, a company with a long history of Medicare fraud troubles.

Dr. Polukoff says he has first-hand knowledge of Sorensen’s surgical practices because he [Polukoff] is an experienced cardiologist and once worked for Sorensen.

Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) Closures

According to Dr. Polukoff, the foramen ovale is a small opening between the two upper chambers of the heart. Our bodies need that opening before we are born to properly circulate blood while we are still in the womb.

After birth, in 75% of the population, the foramen ovale opening simply closes as it is no longer needed. In the other 25% of the population, it fails to close. That is called a patent foramen ovale.

Sounds pretty dangerous right? 25% of us are walking around with a hole in our heart. According to Dr. Polukoff, it is not a big deal. The condition is almost always harmless.

Dr. Polukoff says that it is accepted in the medical community that PFOs should be left alone except in rare instances where a patient has suffered multiple strokes. Even then, experts believe that closure of the opening (cardiac surgery) is not the first option of treatment.

This brief lesson in medical care is necessary because Medicare and Medicaid only pay for treatment that is medically necessary. When it comes to PFO closures, there are specific guidelines that medical providers like Sorensen should follow.

Dr. Polukoff claims that nationally, only a few hundred PFO closures are performed each year. Considering there are 5500 hospitals in the United States, these procedures are quite rare. Yet Dr. Sorensen claims to have performed over 2500 PFO and ASD closures!

Dr. Polukoff claims that Sorensen is such a crook that on two occasions, he observed Sorensen puncture a hole between the chambers of a patient’s heart simply so he could fix it! In his own words, “Dr. Polukoff personally observed Sorensen perform medically unnecessary PFO closures at St. Mark’s. In fact, on at least two occasions Dr. Polukoff observed Sorensen create a PFO by puncture of the atrial septum in patients who were found to have an intact septum during surgery.”

If true, Sorensen belongs in prison. So does the leadership at HCA for allowing this to occur on their watch. Two other HCA hospitals were already being scrutinized for unwanted cardiac procedures. None of this should be a surprise to HCA or St. Mark’s.

Medical Necessity and the False Claims Act

The federal False Claims Act is a Civil War era law that allows private citizens with inside information about fraud to blow the whistle and collect a reward. To be eligible for the reward, federal or state healthcare dollars must be involved. That usually means Medicare, Medicaid or Tricare.

The awards are paid from whatever monies the government collects from the wrongdoers. The reward is 15% to 30% of what the wrongdoer pays to the government. Because HCA has been in so much trouble and because Sorensen’s actions endanger patient lives, we expect huge damages if Dr. Polukoff’s claims are true. Under the Act, the government can collect triple damages and penalties of over $20,000 per each falsely billed procedure.

Healthcare fraud can take many forms. We have seen cases involving billing for services not performed, overcharging and in this case, performing cardiac surgical procedures without medical necessity.

In recent years, medical necessity cases have become difficult to win. Judges and jurors don’t feel comfortable substituting their opinions for that of an experienced physician. Simply because two doctors have different opinions doesn’t mean one is guilty of fraud. It simply means that at times, reasonable minds can disagree.

In this case a federal judge in Utah tossed Dr. Polukoff’s claim. The trial judge took the rather extreme position that a “medical judgment cannot be false under the False Claims Act.” In other words, when there is a difference of opinion, the courts won’t get involved and call one fraudulent.

That of course leads to the ridiculous statistical anomaly like in this case. Do we believe that folks in Utah have more holes in their heart needing surgery than the rest of the county combined?

In July, a three judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals reversed the trial court decision. They said that there was no “bright-line rule that a medical judgment can never serve as the basis for an FCA claim.”

The court also ruled that simply because Sorensen said the surgeries were “reasonable and necessary” doesn’t mean anything if his opinions do not conform to the government’s definition of “reasonable and necessary.”

The ruling means that the case can proceed against Sorensen, Intermountain Medical Center, St Mark’s Hospital and St. Mark’s parent, HCA.

Call for Medicare Fraud Whistleblowers

Anyone who thinks Medicare fraud is a victimless crime need only read the complaint filed by Dr. Polukoff. Assuming he is correct, thousands of patients needlessly suffered pain and unnecessary disruption of their lives. We don’t know if anyone died during surgery, but poking holes in someone’s heart simply so you can fix the hole and bill Medicare is barbaric and dangerous. It elevates corporate greed to a new level.

The Appeals Court decision does not mean any of the defendants have been found guilty of any wrongdoing. But it does indicate there is enough merit for the case to proceed. Ultimately a jury will decide if the case doesn’t first settle.

Healthcare whistleblowers are the new American heroes. They save lives and save tax dollars. They help stop greed and fraud.

If you have inside information about medically unnecessary surgeries or medical treatments, call us. Although these cases are difficult, they are not impossible to win. And the rewards can be in the millions of dollars.

To be a whistleblower you must have inside knowledge of fraud involving taxpayer funded healthcare. [In California and Illinois, whistleblower awards are available for fraud involving private health insurance.]

You also must be the first to file. That means if you want an award, don’t sit on the fence.

To learn more, visit our Medicare fraud whistleblower information page. Have questions or want to see if you have a case? We welcome your call. We can be reached online, by email *protected email* or by phone (414) 704-6731 (direct).

All inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept strictly confidential. You never need to pay us unless we win and collect money on your behalf. And our initial consultations are without any obligation.

The post Case Against Alleged Scalpel Happy Doc Gets Green Light appeared first on Mahany Law.

Arizona Woman Claims She Developed Cancer Because of Exposure to Monsanto Roundup

An Arizona woman filed suit in federal court alleging she developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma as a result of years of exposure to the popular weed killer, Roundup. The herbicide is produced by Monsanto.

Linda Dennis of Mesa says she used Roundup for 9 years. She was diagnosed with cancer in 2005. Back then, doctors didn’t know the cause of her cancer. Today Ms. Dennis believes it was caused by glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup.

She claims that while using the product she thought it was safe. Monsanto never warned her it was dangerous.

Normally, personal injury cases must be filed within a few years of the illness or injury. Many states allow the period in which to sue, called a statute of limitation, to be extended if the victim did not know and had no reason to know that they had a possible claim.

There are now some 8000 known lawsuits pending against Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer. These suits were recently given a boost when a California man was awarded $289 million by a San Francisco jury. The jurors in that case believed that DeWayne “Lee” Johnson

developed cancer because of his years spent as a school groundskeeper. His job required that he frequently use the commercial version of Roundup called Ranger Pro.

Her suit is especially telling as it outlines serious claims of fraud by Monsanto. As each new Roundup case progresses, we learn new allegations of fraud and coverups by Monsanto.

Popularity of Roundup

Monsanto discovered glyphosate in 1974. Within months, the company knew it had the most powerful herbicide on the market. By 2001, it was the number one used herbicide in the United States. By 2012 it would be the most widely used in the world.

The product is so widely used that is now found in rivers and lakes throughout the United States. More ominously, it is also often found in the urine of agricultural workers. A 2012 European study reported in the scientific journal ithakajournal (journal of viticulture, ecology and climate-farming) found that glyphosate is now present in the urine of many city dwellers.

How does a herbicide get into the urine of an urban dweller? Food. Most of the corn in the United States and many other foods are treated with glyphosate. It doesn’t kill the crops because Monsanto has developed genetically altered seeds that resist the chemical.

Monsanto brags that Ranger Pro and Roundup kill weeds but not crop plants. They have a right to brag because their product is certainly deadly on weeds.

We worry because glyphosate doesn’t easily break down. That means when we eat glyphosate treated crops, we are ingesting weed killers! And those weed killers are ingested when we eat treated crops.

According to the ithakajournal,

“Glyphosate is the main active substance used in most commercial herbicides. It poisons not only plants, but also animals and humans. When testing for glyphosate contamination in an urban population, a German university found significant contamination in all urine samples with levels 5 to 20 times above the legal limit for drinking water.

“To this day Monsanto continues to advertise its Roundup products as environmentally friendly and claims that neither animals nor humans arehttp://www.ithaka-journal.net/druckversionen/e052012-herbicides-urine.pdf affected by this toxin. Environmentalists, veterinarians, medical doctors and scientists, however, have raised increasing alarms about the danger of glyphosate in the animal and human food chain and the environment. The fact that glyphosate has been found in animals and humans is of great concern. In search for the causes of serious diseases of entire herds of animals in northern Germany, especially cattle, glyphosate has repeatedly been detected in the urine, feces, milk and feed of the animals…”

The researchers who reported their findings in ithakajournal questioned the safety of glyphosate. They were not alone.

In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (“IARC”), an agency of the World Health Organization (“WHO”), published their findings on glyphosate. Their results were based on studies conducted over all over the world.

The results? On July 29, 2015, IARC classified glyphosate as a Group 2A herbicide meaning it is probably carcinogenic. And the cancer that concerned them the most? Non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

In reaching its conclusion, the glyphosate working group found the product caused DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells. They also found evidence of cancerous tumors in mice exposed to the chemical.

The group also looked a study that examined 57,311 licensed pesticide applicators in Iowa and North Carolina. The results suggested an association between glyphosate and multiple myeloma, hairy cell leukemia, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

History of Glyphosate and Roundup in the USA

It took until 2015 before a major governing body recognized the active ingredient in Roundup and Ranger Pro was a probable carcinogen. Or did it?

Dig into the archives of the EPA and you will see that in 1985 the agency originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans. We believe that intense pressure from Monsanto caused the EPA to change its classification to “evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans” in 1991. In EPA – speak, that is a “Group E.”

In reclassifying glyphosate to evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans, the EPA said, “It should be emphasized, however, that designation of an agent in Group E is based on the available evidence at the time of evaluation and should not be interpreted as a definitive conclusion that the agent will not be a carcinogen under any circumstances.”

Why did the EPA change its determination and reclassify glyphosate? We think it was based on pressure from Monsanto. Pressure that included studies funded by Monsanto that suggested their herbicides were safe.

Monsanto used a laboratory called Industrial Bio-Test laboratories (“IBT”) to do many of the studies needed to register glyphosate with the EPA.

In 1976, the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) inspected IBT. That inspection found a discrepancy between the raw data and the lab’s final report relating on glyphosate.

The FDA wasn’t the only government agency that had concerns with Monsanto’s testing lab, IBT. The EPA reviewed IBT’s toxicology studies on glyphosate and found they were invalid.  An EPA official said it was “hard to believe the scientific integrity of the studies when they said they took specimens of the uterus from male rabbits.”

Three executives of IBT were convicted of fraud in 1983.

Monsanto’s other testing lab also doesn’t earn any integrity awards. Monsanto hired Craven Laboratories in 1991 to conduct additional studies on Roundup and Ranger Pro. That year the owner of Craven Laboratories was indicted (and later convicted) of fraudulent laboratory practices. Fourteen other employees were also charged.

New York Questions Safety of Glyphosate

In 1996, the New York Attorney General charged Monsanto with allegations of false advertising. Their complaint was focused on the safety claims of Roundup and Ranger Pro spray-on glyphosate-based herbicides

The state believed that many of the statements made by Monsanto were false and misleading.  Some examples of the claims they disbelieved include:

• “Glyphosate is less toxic to rats than table sale following acute oral ingestion.
• “Glyphosate’s safety margin is much greater than required. It has over a 1,000-fold safety margin in food and over a 700-fold safety margin for workers who manufacture it or use it.
• “You can feel good about using herbicides by Monsanto. They carry a toxicity category rating of ‘practically non-toxic’ as it pertains to mammals, birds and fish.
• “Roundup can be used where kids and pets will play and breaks down into natural material.”

Monsanto didn’t admit any wrongdoing but did agree to stop the claims that New York found were false or misleading.

Many of the studies touted by Monsanto deal with the safety of glyphosate. We believe that the scientific data shows glyphosate is a dangerous carcinogen. Let’s expand the inquiry to Roundup and Ranger Pro. The major ingredient in those products is glyphosate but the product contains other chemicals as well.

One study says that the supposedly inert ingredients in the two Monsanto herbicide products when mixed with glyphosate make the finished product far more dangerous.

To make Roundup more effective, Monsanto adds a surfactant. What is a surfactant? It is a chemical agent that lowers the surface tension between a liquid and a solid. For example, most laundry detergents use surfactants to make sure the detergent is able to lift stains from your laundry.

In a herbicide, surfactants help the poison get into the plant cells. They may also help those same poisons get into human cells.

The surfactants that Monsanto uses in Roundup and Ranger Pro are probably not dangerous if used alone. But one study says they make glyphosate more toxic to humans.

This post wouldn’t be complete without discussing Monsanto’s response. Despite a recent finding that Monsanto’s Ranger Pro product was responsible for school landscaper’s cancer, the company continues to say its product is safe.

Monsanto Insider or Cancer Victim? We Can Help

We believe that there is a clear and direct link between Roundup and certain cancers including myeloma, leukemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is especially scary because it is often difficult to diagnose and can exist in the human body for a long time before being discovered. By then, its often more difficult to treat.

Symptoms of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma often resemble a bad cold or the stress associated with everyday life. These symptoms can include:

• Swollen (but usually painless) lymph nodes (groin, neck and arm pits)
• Abdominal pain
• Night sweats or chills
• Weight loss
• Fatigue
• Chest pain, coughing or shortness of breath
• Fever
• Swollen abdomen
• Chest pain or pressure in the chest
• Bruising easily

If you are suffering from cancer and have had exposure to Roundup or Ranger Pro, you may be entitled to significant monetary damages. Monsanto may be liable for your injuries and damages if those injuries are attributable to their unsafe products. That includes being responsible for products with improper warning labels or instructions.

Damages may include:

• Medical bills
• Future anticipated medical bills
• Pain and suffering
• Medical Monitoring
• Lost wages including future lost wages
• And in some cases, punitive damages

Cancer Victim Because of Exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup or Ranger Pro

Call us immediately. The time to file claims is often very limited and varies by state. Even if you developed cancer years ago, it may not be too late to file a lawsuit. Many states have special rules that only start the clock for injuries on the date that the person knew or should have known of the risks of Roundup. [Monsanto is making that a bit easier because they continue to argue there is no risk!]

To learn more, visit our Monsanto Roundup Claims Page. Have questions or want to see if you are eligible to file?  Contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct).

[See also our On the Trail of Monsanto, Roundup and Cancer post.

Did You Work at Monsanto?

If you work or once worked at Monsanto or any of its testing laboratories, we certainly want to speak with you. We need your help!

In most product’s liability cases, we must prove that the wrongdoer knew that their product was dangerous. We also need to know when they learned of the danger.

There are potentially tens of thousands of people who are suffering horrible cancers, cancers that could have been prevented.

Finding that smoking gun in a company’s millions of pages of records? It is like finding the proverbial in the haystack.

But you may have a copy of the secret memo or know where we should look for records or knows “where the body is buried.” Call us, write us anonymously, send what you think we should know… but do something. Your bravery makes a difference.

Beyond helping individual victims of Roundup exposure, we also want to insure the government takes appropriate action. See our Monsanto whistleblower information page and then call us at the numbers above. Have something you want to share anonymously? Write to us at *protected email*

The post New Monsanto Roundup Weed Killer Suit Claims Fraud appeared first on Mahany Law.

Patient dumping represents one of the darker sides of the medical profession. Physicians take the Hippocratic Oath promising they “will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required.” Unfortunately, hospital administrators don’t take the same oath. These days many seem to care more about the hospital’s financial health rather than the health of their patients. Nowhere is this more evident than with patients who lack insurance.

When a hospital refuses to treat an uninsured person or sends them to another city, the practice is called “patient dumping.”

Reports of patient dumping became a problem in the 1980’s as hospitals saw a rapid rise of uninsured, poor patients. Few states had any laws that prevented a hospital from denying service. Congress responded with the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act – EMTALA for short. That law says that any hospital that accepts Medicare has a duty to provide medical screening and stabilizing treatment to any patient, regardless of ability to pay, who seeks care in a hospital emergency room.

For a patient to be protected by EMTALA, the injury or illness must be serious or the patient must be in labor. And the services must be sought at an emergency room. Urgent cares don’t count.

In simple terms, if you show up at an ER with a stroke, fractured skull, heart attack or you are in labor, the facility must admit you. They may not be required to keep you but they at least must stabilize you. That means providing emergency cardiac car or delivering your baby.

According to the regulations, a hospital can’t refuse discharge or transfer a critical care patient until any conditions that are immediately life-threatening, limb-threatening, or organ-threatening have been treated to the best of the hospital’s ability to ensure the patient does not need further inpatient care.

Since its passage in 1986, many hospitals have attempted to circumvent the law resulting in a pandemic of EMTALA claims.

Why do hospitals continue to illegally dump patients? Money.

Hospitals consider charity care an unfunded mandate. They think taxpayers should fit the bill. Nationally uncompensated care represents 6% of hospital healthcare costs.

How do these cases get discovered? Sometimes its patients that complain. Other times it is local public hospitals that see a sudden influx of patients with no insurance.

California believes that some hospitals in Nevada are deliberately sending critically ill patients to big cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles. (Hospitals aren’t the only ones playing this game. Some police departments have been accused of engaging in “Greyhound justice.” That usually means putting homeless or petty criminals on buses or trains bound to other cities so that these folks become someone else’s responsibility.)

EMTALA: Whistleblower Rewards and Patient Lawsuits

Despite being on the books many years, EMTALA cases are not seen often in the courts.  Medicare and the Justice Department resolve them without trial and patients don’t know they have rights. (Because many turned away are undocumented residents, they are also afraid of the courts.)

Patient Lawsuits

If a patient is wrongly denied service, he or she can sue for damages. The law establishes a private cause of action for violations. Any person who suffers harm as a direct result of a participating hospital’s violation of EMTALA may file a lawsuit.

How much can a patient expect if successful? EMTALA looks to the damages available for personal injury victims under the laws of the state in which the hospital is located.

What does all this mean? Let’s look at a real example. In a recent Louisiana case, a young teenage girl, “J.S.”, was seen in the emergency room of the Northern Louisiana Medical Center. She was first seen in the early morning hours. Later a physician would examine her. At 9:07 am he ordered an MRI.

The MRI was not performed until after 3:00 pm. By the time the MRI was performed and physicians realized she had a spinal girl injury, the girl was permanently paralyzed.

The parents sued the hospital under EMTALA claiming that the lengthy delay was the same as refusing her treatment. The doctor testified that the delay was the result of a hospital policy “that requires that emergency room requests for MRIs be summarily denied and delayed until reimbursement from the insurance company has been certified.”

The girls’ parents believe that if she received timely treatment, their daughter’s injury could have been treated early enough to avoid being paralyzed. If they win, the damages could be in the millions.

Even though the law was passed in 1986, early cases often resulted in patients losing. Access to the courts by the poor and undocumented is already difficult. The courts didn’t help.

Many courts said that proof of intent or improper motive was a prerequisite to a successful EMTALA claim. In other words, it wasn’t enough for a patient to prove he or she were improperly turned away. The patients also had to prove the hospital intended to violate EMTALA. For all practical purposes, EMTALA lawsuits became unwinnable. There was no way for a patient to prove what the hospital was thinking when he or she was turned away.

The good news came in 1999 when the U.S Supreme Court tossed out the improper intent or motive requirements. Proving patient dumping complaints became much easier.

Of the cases we see, most patient dumping cases with for profit hospitals. We also see these cases in areas along the Mexican border and areas with high populations of undocumented residents or areas with high rates of poverty.

If you were illegally denied emergency treatment and believe you have an EMTALA claim, please give us a call. Contact us online, by email *protected email* or by phone at 414-704-6731 (direct).

Huge Whistleblower Rewards Possible for Inside Info about Patient Dumping Violations

We don’t think EMTALA violations occur randomly. It is almost never the doctor who suddenly decides not to treat a person who is poor and uninsured. Usually those decisions are made by senior hospital management.  That means if it happens once in a hospital, it probably happens many times.

In a 2013 case, an acute care administrator at Southwest Regional Medical Center, a for profit hospital in Waynesburg, Pennsylvania, claimed she was fired after seeking to report EMTALA patient dumping claims to the state health department.

The administrator claims a pregnant woman was refused treatment and referred to another hospital. When she sought to report the violation, she says that the hospital’s CEO told her no. Knowing the hospital’s behavior was wrong, she insisted that the incident should be reported. At that point, the CEO allegedly replied that if she reported the violation, the Department of Health “would be on us like flies on shit.”

We know that reporting these violations is challenging. Many hospital workers and physicians fear for their jobs. Luckily, whistleblowers are protected to state and federal whistleblower anti-retaliation laws.

We also know that patients turned away in violation of the law are by definition in extreme pain and most in need of help.

When this blog was first written in 2013, we said that EMTALA patient dumping cases could be the basis for a federal false claims whistleblower action. That law allows healthcare workers and others with inside information about federally funded healthcare fraud to collect an award for reporting wrongdoing. Million dollar awards are common.

By their very nature, patients suffering from an EMTALA violation by definition don’t receive proper care. They usually received no care.

So how can there be a Medicare or Medicaid fraud? The government isn’t losing any money.

Medicare law says any hospital that accepts Medicare insurance must comply with all Medicare requirements. One of those requirements is EMTALA. We believe that hospitals can’t pick and choose which laws they will obey. If they want Medicare money, they have to comply with EMTALA and promptly treat women in labor and the very sick and injured.

As noted above, this post was first written in 2013. We were pretty certain back then that whistleblower awards were available for EMTALA violations.

Five years later we are happy to report that we are not alone in our thinking!

Dr. Blake Vanderlan worked at Central Mississippi Medical Center, also known as Merit Health Center-Jackson. He believed that the hospital wrongfully transferred African-American trauma patients without insurance to the University of Mississippi hospital.

According to his complaint, Dr. Vanderlan “became aware of multiple instances of patients presenting to the [Jackson HMA] emergency department and being denied the care required by a Level III trauma center and/or being transferred/dumped to a Level I facility in violation of EMTALA,”

The hospital denies the claims.

In a ruling last week, the court indicated it was open to considering that EMTALA violations, if proven, can give rise to a whistleblower reward. The case is still ongoing.

Each time a hospital bills the Medicare program, the hospital certifies that it is complying with a number of healthcare laws including EMTALA. That means hospitals that certify thousands of bills and collect millions from Medicare may be liable for big penalties under the false claims act. Congress doesn’t want hospitals to collect from Medicare while turning away poor and indigent patients.

We are seeking both patients and healthcare workers with inside information about illegal patient dumping schemes. We are especially interested in speaking to current or former employees of HCA, Tenet Healthcare and other “for profit” hospitals as well as schemes that involve undocumented residents.

Whistleblowers under the false claims act are entitled to receive up to 30% of whatever the government collects from healthcare providers under this program.

For more information, contact attorney Brian Mahany at *protected email* or by telephone at (414) 704-6731. All inquiries are kept in strict confidence and protected by the attorney – client privilege.

The post Whistleblower Claims She Was Fired For EMTALA Claim appeared first on Mahany Law.

[Ed Note:  BUSTED! Spoiler alert! We were correct in our suspicions,Dr. Reziuddin Siddique has been indicted for Medicare fraud. This story was first posted n August of 2016 and was most recently updated in September 2018.]

Not a week goes by that we don’t receive several whistleblower tips. If we think we can help the whistleblower stop the fraud and earn an award, we try to make a case. Sometimes that becomes difficult, however, particularly when the whistleblower is an outsider such as a patient. In this post we are seeking your help and information about Reziuddin Siddique. The information is needed to supplement a tip we have already received.

False Claims Act and Whistleblower Awards

The False Claims Act is a Civil War era law that pays whistleblowers for information about fraud involving government funds or a government program. Because Medicare is funded with tax dollars, whistleblowers with information about Medicare fraud can receive cash awards.

One of the requirements to collect an award is that the whistleblower must have inside or “original source” information about the fraud. Who has the best inside information? Former employees, billing clerks, nurses and others who work for the wrongdoer.

Technically a patient can qualify as having inside information but its tough. Their inside information is usually limited to one incident. The False Claims Act is a fraud statute. Is the whistleblower’s information evidence of a simple billing or coding mistake or is it fraud? To win, we must prove a pattern of fraud. Once incident is not a pattern.

When we receive patient tips, we usually must perform additional background investigations. We have private investigators and a wealth of tools to help us but sometimes we need to reach out to the public. In the last post, we sought information about Dr. Alberto Manahan. In this post we seek information about another Dallas area physician, Dr. Reziuddin Siddique.

Reziuddin Siddique – McKinley Texas

We are investigating Dr. Siddique after receiving a report that he spends little time with patients but bills as if he had an extended visit. Our investigation reveals that many of the billing codes used by Dr. Siddique suggests that he spends 30 minutes or more with patients. However, our whistleblower believes he spends very little time or any time with his hospice and nursing home patients. According to our information, Dr. Reziuddin Siddique practices geriatric medicine and in fact does have many patients in hospice care and skilled nursing homes.

Overbilling and Medicare Fraud

Overbilling for services is a common indicator of Medicare and Medicaid fraud. It is also stealing. Imagine if you paid a mechanic by the hour to repair your car. You would be very upset if he or she billed you for 4 hours of work but only spent a few minutes fixing the problem.

Is Dr. Siddique guilty of Medicare fraud? Your information may help us find out. If you have any information whatsoever, positive or negative, call attorney Tim Granitz at 414-258-2375 or email *protected email* Any information you provide will be used for investigations purpose only and will not be used without your permission.

If you have information about fraud involving other healthcare providers, we want to speak to you too. Over the last several years we have helped our clients stamp out massive frauds and collect over $100 million in award monies.

Without whistleblowers, fraud would become worse than it is today. Many lives would also be lost. Overbilling for services is theft but sometimes Medicare fraud endangers human lives. Performing unnecessary surgeries or dispensing dangerous narcotics simply to bilk more money out of Medicare is particularly sinister. So is squeezing in so many patients in a day that care becomes substandard.

When doctors put profits over patients, everyone loses. If you information about Medicare fraud involving hospitals, home care clinics, EMS providers (ambulances), durable medical goods, pharmacies or hospitals paying kickbacks, call us. We may be able to get you the next big award.

Once again, our contact information is as follows: Attorney Tim Granitz can be reached 414-258-2375 or by email at *protected email*

New client inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept confidential. (Just calling with a tip? We will keep that information confidential too.)

[Updates]

Dr. Reziuddin Siddique Indicted!

On February 28, 2017, The U.S. Department of Justice announced the indictment of Reziuddin Siddique and 15 others in a Dallas area $60 million Medicare fraud scheme. The others in the indictment are:

• Bradley J. Harris, 35, of Frisco, Texas
• Amy L. Harris, 42, of Frisco, Texas
• Melanie L. Murphey, 35, of Fort Worth, Texas
• Patricia B. Armstrong, 33, of Coppell, Texas
• Mark E. Gibbs, 46, of Lindsay, Texas
• Laila N. Hirjee, 50, of Plano, Texas
• Syed M. Aziz, 51, of Frisco, Texas
• Charles R. Leach, 64, of Arlington, Texas
• Jessica J. Love, 37, of Gainesville, Texas
• Ali Rizvi, 49, of Carrollton, Texas
• Tammie L. Little, 55, of Brashear, Texas
• Mary Jaclyn Pannell, 29, of Krum, Texas
• Taryn E. Stuart, 32, of Sanger, Texas
• Slade C. Brown, 47, of Plano, Texas
• Samuel D. Anderson, 35, of Carrollton, Texas

All those indicted are allegedly affiliated with Novus Health Services of Dallas.

Prosecutors say that from July 2012 to September 2016, “Novus billed Medicare and Medicaid more than sixty million dollars for fraudulent hospice services, of which more than thirty-five million dollars was paid to Novus. Specifically, defendants submitted false claims for hospice services, submitted false claims for continuous care hospice services, recruited ineligible hospice beneficiaries by providing kickbacks to referring physicians and healthcare facilities, and falsified and destroyed documents to conceal these activities from Medicare.”

Novus is allegedly owned by an accountant named Bradley Harris. They say that he intended on growing Novus as quickly as possible so that it could be sold for a profit. To do this, he engaged in a number of illegal schemes including submitting false claims for hospice care to Medicare, recruiting ineligible hospice beneficiaries, paying kickbacks to doctors to refer patients and falsifying and destroying records in an effort to conceal his alleged wrongdoing.

As part of the scheme, doctors such as Reziuddin Siddique were paid as “medical directors” even though they provided little or no actual oversight.

Often in these schemes, a careful review of the records shows that a physician cannot possibly see the number of patients as his bill suggests. This is what our whistleblower suggested, billing for an extended 30 minute review or visit even if he never saw the patient.

According to the indictment, another physician affiliated with Novus, Dr. Mark Gibbs, certified that he conducted multiple evaluations at 19 different locations – some 200 miles apart – and all before lunch on a single day! Dr. Laila Hirjee certified she saw a patient in Texas even though her travel records show she was in Hawaii.

The Scheme Turns Deadly

To justify hospice care, patients need to be near the end of their life. To make the medical records appear that the patients were truly terminal, prosecutors say that Novus nurses would inject some patients with high doses of morphine, whether or not they needed it. According to the indictment, “There were instances when these excessive dosages resulted in serious bodily injury or death…”

The indictment also suggests that Bradley Harris, Novus’s owner and CEO, was amused by the overdosing. Prosecutors claim they recovered an email between Harris and a nurse discussing a patient “J.J.”

Harris “I told this chick [referring to a nurse] if she would just give her 1ml of Ativan and turn her she would die.”

A nurse then texted another Novus worker and said she was taking over J.J.’s care because Harris “doesn’t think Nigerian nurses are medicating properly.”

Harris then said “[expletive] woman is still alive… I need some boots on the ground.”

When told that the patient died, Harris allegedly said, “Haha. Nice work.”

If the allegations are true, they are sickening. This is why whistleblowers are so important. This scheme allegedly went on for years before a whistleblower stepped forward. We assume that most of the hospice nurses were not killing patients, overmedicating them or engaged in neglect. But that doctors and nurses even let these things happen is disturbing.

In our opinion, Dr. Siddique is every bit as guilty if he assumed the role of medical director but never visited or checked on the hospice patients.

As of September 2018, Reziuddin Siddique remains free on bail. Incredibly, after being released on bond, Siddique filed a motion seeking to change a federal magistrate judge’s ruling that he not bill Medicare for services to patients while out on bail.

We don’t know what will happen at trial but there is a good bet from the motions already filed in this case that Siddique will try to convince jurors that his Medicare number was used without his permission. Since he likely received the monies from Medicare, however, it will be interesting to see if jurors will believe him.

The takeaways here are twofold. First, Medicare fraud is not a victimless crime.

Second, whistleblowers are heroes. This tragedy could have been stopped years earlier if more folks had stepped forward. As noted earlier in the post, there are large cash whistleblower rewards available for people who step forward and report these crimes. And under federal and state law, retaliation is illegal.

If you are a healthcare worker with inside information about Medicare or Medicaid fraud, contact us online. Just looking for more information and not ready to call? Visit our Medicare fraud whistleblower information page.

MahanyLaw – America’s Healthcare Fraud Lawyers

Note: Dr. Siddique has not been convicted of any charges. The information contained in this post mostly comes from his indictment. We remind everyone that an indictment is merely a finding that there is probable cause to believe that a crime occurred.

The post New Medicare Fraud Investigation – Reziuddin Siddique appeared first on Mahany Law.

This post is written for coders and medical billing specialists. If you are not in the medical profession, we apologize in advance for the technical jargon. It is necessary to understand this post. If you are a coder, you probably know what a Modifier 25 code is and how it works. Here is a very quick refresher:

Modifier 25 is a significant, separately identifiable evaluation and management (E/M) service by the same physician on the same day of the procedure or other service. It is one of the most often used Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes.

Modifier 25 creates the opportunity to capture physician work done when separate E/M services are provided at the time of another E/M visit or procedural service. According to the Office of the Inspector General for Health and Human Services, it is also one of the most abused codes.

Because this post is geared towards helping medical coders, billing specialists and other healthcare providers qualify for whistleblower rewards, our discussion is confined to Medicare, Medicaid and Tricare, however private insurance carriers follow similar rules. (More on that below.)

Medical Billing and CPT Codes

Healthcare providers are required to use CPT codes on their claim submissions to government health insurance programs. These codes are a set of standardized medical codes developed and maintained by the American Medical Association (AMA). CPT codes are used to describe and report medical, surgical and diagnostic procedures and services to public and private health insurance programs for medical billing purposes.

Government funded healthcare programs use CPT codes to determine both coverage, i.e., if the services are covered, and reimbursement, i.e., how much will these program pay for the billed medical procedures and services.

There are thousands of CPT codes and each procedure or service or item furnished to a patient has a specific CPT code. Each CPT code receives a certain level of reimbursement, which can vary depending on what other codes are billed. The amount of money a physician or medical provider is paid for its services by Medicare or Medicaid depends on which CPT codes are used on claims submissions.

The Medicare National Correct Coding Initiative (NCCI) was implemented to promote national correct coding methodologies and to control improper coding leading to inappropriate payment. NCCI Procedure-to-Procedure (PTP) code pair edits are automated prepayment edits that prevent improper payment when certain codes are submitted together for covered services.

Both Medicare and Medicaid have NCCI Edits. NCCI policies and edits address procedures and services performed by the same provider for the same beneficiary on the same date of service. PTP edits define pairs of Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS)/CPT codes that should not be reported together for a variety of reasons.

For example, let’s say a patient goes to a physician’s office with an infected lesion that needs to be drained. The physician should not be charging for both the draining and the evaluation of the patient. Medicare views that as one service.

Now let’s look at an example where a Modifier 25 code is appropriate. In this case our patient sees a dermatologist for treatment of some dermatitis on her scalp.  He writes a prescription. Before the patient leaves she tells the doctor of suspicious spot on her neck. He looks at it and decides to have it biopsied immediately. Those are separate services performed during the same office visit as the E/M service.

Modifiers May Sometimes Be Used to Bypass Medicare and Medicaid Edits

The CPT Manual and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) define modifiers that may be appended to HCPCS/CPT codes to provide additional information about the services rendered. Modifiers consist of two alphanumeric characters. In this post we discuss MOFDIFIER 25.

In certain circumstances, NCCI edits can by bypassed by the use of these modifiers. The CPT Manual and CMS define modifiers that may be appended to HCPCS/CPT codes to provide additional information about the services rendered. “Modifiers may be appended to HCPCS/CPT codes only if the clinical circumstances justify the use of the modifier. A modifier should not be appended to a HCPCS/CPT code solely to bypass an NCCI PTP edit if the clinical circumstances do not justify its use. If the Medicare program imposes restrictions on the use of a modifier, the modifier may only be used to bypass an NCCI PTP edit if the Medicare restrictions are fulfilled.” American Medical Association, General Correct Coding Policies for National Correct Coding Initiative Policy Manual for Medicare Services, revision date January 1, 2018, Chapter I, I-18.

As noted above, one of the most common modifiers is Modifier 25, a “significant, separately identifiable evaluation and management service by the same physician or other qualified health care professional on the same day of the procedure or other service.

Modifier 25 may be appended to an E/M CPT code to indicate that the E/M service is significant and separately identifiable from other services reported on the same date of service.” If the E/M service does not meet the requirement for a significant separately identifiable service, then modifier 25 cannot be reported and a separate E/M service would not be separately reimbursed in addition to the reimbursement for the bundled code.

Modifier 25 is used to indicate that an E/M service was provided on the same day as another procedure that would normally bundle under the NCCI. The CPT modifier 25 signifies that the E/M service was performed for a reason unrelated to the other procedure and therefore, it is separately payable.

Modifier 25 Codes Frequently Abused

In 2005, CMS did a study and found that 35 percent of Medicare claims for modifier 25 did not meet Medicare program requirements. Ever since, CMS has increased its scrutiny of codes reported with this modifier, sometimes resulting in significant repayment to Medicare. If the misuse is deliberate or reckless, the provider can be liable for triple damages and huge fines.

Sometimes the overbilling comes from ignorance and other times it is deliberate fraud. Depending on the circumstances, whistleblower rewards may be available for those reporting the fraud.

Let’s look at an example.

United States v. FWC Urogynecology LLC (Medicare Fraud)

In 2016, Holly Loebl filed a whistleblower case against Urogynecology Specialists of Florida and others claiming the practice was engaged in fraudulent billing practices.

Holly is a physician’s assistant licensed in Florida. In July 2015 she went to work for Urogynecology. She performed pre-operation visits, post op visits, ordered tests and prescribed medications to patients of the practice.

Within a few months or working at the practice, Holly says she was asked to “upcode” more visits. She refused believing that the visits had been properly billed. Why did they want her to upcode? She was told that the office was “leaving too much money on the table…”

Shortly thereafter, Holly began noticing that “many of her patient files contained claims for procedures that were not ordered or merely on the schedule but not yet ordered or performed.” It was then that the practice’s chief clinical officer allegedly told her to use modifier codes to make non billable post-op visits billable. She refused knowing this to be illegal.

The code often used to make the non-billable post-ops billable? Modifier 25.

Ms. Loebl continued to complain about the illegal billing and was terminated.

Most whistleblowers try to fix things internally before finding a lawyer to file a whistleblower claim. Holly Loebl was no exception. Only when folks are ignored or suffer retaliation do most step forward. In Holly’s case, stepping forward meant filing a whistleblower reward claim under the federal False Claims Act.

In July of this year, the Justice Department intervened in her case and fined FWC Urogynecology LLC $1.7 million for misusing Medicare Billing Codes. Prosecutors agreed that FWC Urogynecology “knowingly billed modifier 25 for services that were not billable or that it did not provide.”

In announcing the settlement, a Health and Human Services special agent said in a prepared statement, “Misrepresenting alleged services to inflate costs is just plain and simple greed. We will continue to thoroughly investigate health care companies that engage in schemes to defraud the American taxpayer.”

For stepping forward and reporting the fraud, Ms. Loebl will receive $306,000.

False Claims Act Pays Whistleblowers Who Report Modifier 25 Fraud

As demonstrated in this complaint, the misuse of Modifier 25 by Urogynecology does not appear to be an accident. According to the complaint, the practice’s chief clinical officer was warned that the misuse of billing codes was taking place yet took no action.

Wrongful intent can also be demonstrated by billing for services not even rendered.

Under the False Claims Act, people with inside information about Medicare and Medicaid fraud can receive an award of between 15% and 30% of whatever the government recovers from the wrongdoers. (In this case, Ms. Loebl received 18%.)

To receive a reward, you must file a claim in federal court. Simply calling a tollfree Medicare fraud hotline does not make you eligible for a reward. While the complaint is being investigated by the government, the case remains under seal meaning it is secret. Not even the wrongdoers are made aware of the complaint or the identity of the person who filed it.

The False Claims Act also makes retaliation illegal. If you are fired or demoted because you reported fraud, you are eligible to also receive two times any lost wages and your attorneys’ fees.

Many states (29) also have separate reward programs for state funded Medicaid. In California and Illinois, rewards may be available for reporting healthcare fraud involving private insurance.

Ms. Loebl is a hero. Hundreds of healthcare workers just like her step forward each year to report fraud and greed.

Thankfully, no patients were injured in this case. We have seen cases, however, where a few depraved doctors performed medically unnecessary procedures or prescribed unneeded drugs simply to increase their billings.

If you have evidence of Medicare or Medicaid fraud, contact us for a free, no obligation evaluation of your case. If we believe you have a case, we will file the necessary complaints in federal court and prosecute the case if necessary. You don’t have to pay us for our services unless you win and recover money. All inquiries are protected by the attorney – client privilege and kept confidential.

For more information, contact attorney Brian Mahany at *protected email*, by phone 414-704-6731 or online. We also encourage you to visit our 11 step whistleblower guide.

The post Modifier 25 – Healthcare Fraud and Whistleblower Rewards appeared first on Mahany Law.