CHERYL COLDIRON, Applicant,
v.
COMPUWARE CORPORATION; CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, on behalf of RELIANCE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, in liquidation, administered by INTERCARE INSURANCE SERVICES; formerly administered by GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, INC., Defendants.
No. SRO 0088351
California Workers Compensation Decisions
Workers Compensation Appeals Board State of California
2002
OPINION, ORDERS, AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION
(EN BANC)
MERLE
C. RABINE, Chairman.
On
November 26, 2001, the Appeals Board granted the petition for
reconsideration filed by Compuware Corporation (Compuware) in
which defendant Compuware challenged the Findings and Award
issued by the workers' compensation administrative law
judge (WCJ) on August 31, 2001. In that decision, the WCJ
followed and adopted the stipulations of parties as true in
finding, among other things, that Cheryl Coldiron
(applicant), born October 6, 1955, sustained an admitted
industrial injury to her neck and back on January 13, 1995
while employed by Compuware, permissibly
self-insured. The WCJ awarded in applicant's favor
and against Compuware various benefits including temporary
disability, permanent disability indemnity of $28,203.00,
less specified credit to defendant for applicant's
third-party recovery, and further medical treatment.
The
sole issue raised by Compuware in its petition for
reconsideration is the entity against whom the benefits
should have been awarded by the WCJ, whether against
Compuware or against Reliance National Insurance Company
(Reliance), the latter the employer's insurance carrier.
After
granting reconsideration, the Appeals Board issued an en banc
decision1 on March 20, 2002 (for full text of
opinion, see Coldiron v. Compuware Corporation
(2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 289, Board en banc). We held that
where an employer's liability for workers'
compensation benefits is adjusted by a third-party
administrator, the administrator must disclose to the
Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB), to other
parties in any proceeding in which it is a party, and to its
own counsel, if any, the identity of its client, whether
self-insured employer or insurance carrier. We also held
that, if the client is an insurance carrier, the
administrator must disclose whether the policy includes a
"high self-insured retention," a large deductible,
or any other provision that affects the identity of the
entity actually liable for the payment of compensation. We
further held that failure of the administrator to disclose
the identity of its client may subject it to sanctions
pursuant to Labor Code section 5813. We also stated that this
disclosure should be made no later than at least at the
commencement of any litigation in the case.
In
addition, the Appeals Board issued a Notice of Intention
(NIT) to hold a Commissioner's Conference on April 18,
2002, for clarification of the basis for the arrangement
between Compuware and Reliance and whether compliance had
been met with Insurance Code sections 11650 et seq.,
particularly sections 11657, 11659 and 11660, whether
sanctions of $1,500.00 should be imposed against Gallagher
Bassett Services, Inc. (Gallagher Bassett) who failed to
disclose the identity of Reliance as the insurance carrier
for Compuware, and to further answer issues raised in the
petition for reconsideration. We note that in its petition
for...