Friday, December 13, 2013

New York Top Medicaid Fraud Lawyer Inna Fershteyn: 718-333-2394


New York Top Medicaid Fraud Attorney: OPMC hearings, OMIG investigations, Office of Medicaid Fraud investigations and interviews, representation with Attorney General Medicaid Fraud control unit". Call Law Offices of Inna Fershteyn at 718-333-2394 if you received a letter that you are being investigated for possible medicaid fraud.

Law Office of Inna Fershteyn and Associates, P.C.
1517 Voorhies Ave, 4 Fl
Brooklyn, NY 11235
tel. 718-333-2394
www.advanced-legal.com
www.brooklyntrustandwill.com


Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Medicaid Mayhem Nationwide

Recent news on Medicaid fraud has been overflowing with egregious abuses of the system.  Yet despite scandalous tales of government funds paying for fraudsters’ Tiffany&Co jewelry, luxury cars, and cleaning robots, we must be wary that innocents do not become entangled in the reactionary backlash of a charitable program done wrong.  As the government attempts to recover the money it spent too freely on Meidcaid claims, it is accusing recipients at random  and indicting  community leaders who seek to bring affordable healthcare to those in need.

One medical martyr whose story gained national publicity in September 2013 is Dr. Juan Villarreal, a family dentist in Harlingen, Texas.  In 2011, Dr. Villarreal was accused of Medicaid fraud; via a credible allegation of fraud payment hold, he was ordered to repay the state of Texas $7.8 million or face immediate suspension of funding at the clinic he founded.  For close to two years, Dr. Villarreal was unable to provide treatment to many of his patients, most of whom rely on Medicaid to cover their medical expenses.  

Dr. Villarreal was known as one of the area’s top providers for low-income patients up until the accusations, after which his thirty years of service were forgotten and he found himself being treated like a criminal by an impersonal entity.  In the new frontier of Medicaid fraud investigations, there is no innocent before proven guilty.  The accused are persecuted and punished prematurely, before any verdict is reached, in an effort by the government to save money. 

Legal proceedings which often take years to resolve are obstructing time-sensitive medical treatments with frightening frequency.  Even after the charges are dropped, doctors who were acquitted must suffer routine visits from Meidcaid investigators to ensure that their operations run legally.  While this may sound fine in theory, doctors report that the interviewers are hostile and will harangue patients, going so far as to question children about the purpose of their visit.
Across the nation, justice is being obstructed out of an overzealous attempt to correct a system with deep structural problems. The clincher in Dr. Villarreal’s case is that he was first suspected of fraud not because there was any allegation of fraud, but on account of his high case load.  Dr. Villarreal did not learn this until much later, by which point he was treating his patients out of pocket to the tune of $1.5 million.

While cases of Medicaid fraud in which the accused have overindulged themselves to the point of laughable excess may be entertaining to read, we must remember that hardworking professionals are being prosecuted simultaneously.  With changes in healthcare slated to take effect in the upcoming months we must stop the madness and arrive at a peaceable middle ground.  We must prosecute the selfish and protect the dedicated.

As always, tune in to my blog for more stories from both sides of the field.


(Article Information from San Antonio Express News)


Monday, December 9, 2013

Wall Street Mothers, Stay-Home Fathers

As Husbands Do Domestic Duty, These Women Are Free to Achieve



Marielle Jan de Beur often catches the 6:27 a.m. train to Grand Central Terminal, waiting on the Westchester platform with a swarm of dark-suited men, and then walks 10 blocks to a Park Avenue office fronted by the fountain where Audrey Hepburn cavorted in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” playing a woman scheming to marry a wealthy man.

But when the elevator lets her off at Wells Fargo, she enters another zone, where the gender dynamic that has long underpinned the financial industry is quietly being challenged. Ms. Jan de Beur and some of her colleagues rely on support that growing numbers of women on Wall Street say is enabling them to compete with new intensity: a stay-at-home husband.

In an industry still dominated by men with only a smattering of women in its highest ranks, these bankers make up a small but rapidly expanding group, benefiting from what they call a direct link between their ability to achieve and their husbands’ willingness to handle domestic duties. The number of women in finance with stay-at-home spouses has climbed nearly tenfold since 1980, according to an analysis of census data, and some of the most successful women in the field are among them.
When Ms. Jan de Beur flew to Hong Kong last spring to persuade Asian investors to re-enter the bond market, her husband took their daughter to try on confirmation dresses. Her colleagues Allison Poliniak and Gina Martin Adams share a running commentary on their husbands’ efforts in the kitchen. Nicole Black recently texted her husband, Drew Skinner, as she headed home after a long day of earnings calls. “You want to hit the gym? Go for it,” he replied, agreeing to spend another hour with their two small sons.
“While I was dating Drew and getting married and having kids, I’ve gone from vice president to director to managing director,” Ms. Black said.
These marriages are Wall Street-specific experiments in money, work, family and power. In interviews, dozens of couples provided field notes on their findings.
Many discovered that even with babysitting and household help, the demands of working in finance made a two-career marriage impossible. The arrangement can be socially isolating, they said, leaving both partners out of a child-rearing world still full of “Mommy and Me” classes. The couples told of new questions of marital etiquette, like who makes the big financial decisions or buys the wife’s jewelry when she makes upward of a million dollars a year and the husband earns little or nothing.
It is not clear, however, if these couples are leaders in the march toward gender equality or examples of how little is shifting on Wall Street. The banks say they want to hire and retain more women.
But the solution that turns out to work so well for these women is an inaccessible option for many others, since it requires one spouse to give up a career and the other to earn enough money to support the family. Rather than changing the culture of the banks, which promote policies on flexible hours and work life balance, these women say that to succeed they must give in to its sometimes brutal terms, from 4:45 a.m. wake-ups onward through days of ceaseless competition.
Along the way, the couples have come to question just what is male behavior and female behavior, noting how quickly their preconceived notions dissolve once they depart from assigned roles. The men echo generations of housewives, voicing concern over a loss of earning power and car pool-induced torpor but also pride in their nurturing roles. The women describe themselves as competitive, tough and proud of every dollar they bring in.
“We’re almost like an opposite ’50s couple,” said Mr. Skinner, Nicole Black’s husband. “I’m staying at home, I do the dishes, I do the laundry, I do everything the housewife does. I’m just a dude.”
Not every marriage proceeds as smoothly. One female banker told colleagues that she recently became irritated with her husband, who works part time, telling him, “I wish I had a wife.”
“You can get one when I can get one,” he replied.
Role Reversals
Rye, N.Y., is not an obvious place to mount a stand against established social roles. The town, on the moneyed coast of Long Island Sound, has long been populated by bankers, including John J. Mack, the former chief executive of Morgan Stanley. The clubs at the end of Stuyvesant Avenue have dress codes and sports like lawn bowling, and despite high property taxes, the town has no school buses, a special torture for working parents.
But even Rye has a set of bankers with stay-at-home husbands, among them Ms. Jan de Beur, an executive in Wells Fargo’s research department, and her architect-turned-artist husband, Jim Langley.
When they married 13 years ago, some of Ms. Jan de Beur’s male colleagues scoffed, suggesting that she would become useless in the workplace. Marriage turned out to be one of her better career moves. By the time she became pregnant, her husband was working extremely long hours for an architecture firm that was pressuring him to relocate, and he made less than half of what she did. The solution seemed obvious.
Ten years later, the life they have put together feels comfortable and well ordered: two bright, talkative children, 10 and 7 years old; a white-clapboard house that feels more cozy than imposing; and time in a sunny third-floor studio for Mr. Langley, who keeps books of work by Andrew Wyeth and Winslow Homer on his shelves. He has moments of wonder with his children, like playing kickball during a summer rainfall and making anatomical sculptures from tree branches.
In interviews, Ms. Jan de Beur, driven and precise, praised her husband’s nurturing skills. Mr. Langley sounded proud if a bit taken aback by his wife’s success. “I’m aware of how lucky I am,” he said.
Still, his wife, along with other women in the same situation, suspects that the arrangement is harder on the men. Some of Mr. Langley’s peers say the chatter at backyard gatherings about bonuses can make them wince: If a half-million-dollar salary is considered unimpressive in some Wall Street circles, where does that leave them?
When people ask what he does, Mr. Langley could say artist — he gives the buildings and landscapes he paints expressive personalities of their own — but he has just begun trying to sell his work. Other fathers in similar situations say they often tell white lies: They are retired, they are consultants, they work at home.
Mr. Langley generally goes with “stay-at-home dad.”
“That’s what I call myself,” he said over lunch at a restaurant in Rye, the other tables filled with groups of women. “I wouldn’t say I like it.”
What response does he get?
“There’s usually a long pause,” he said.
Feeling Excluded
Half a century ago, Betty Friedan wrote “The Feminine Mystique” not far from where some of the female bankers live today. Even though their husbands have had far different experiences and options than Ms. Friedan’s frustrated 1960s housewives, they sometimes express similar sentiments.
Some wonder what has come of their education, confess that they do not know how to make their way back to work after what they had hoped would be a temporary break, or admit that they do not quite understand their wives’ work. Others have turned themselves into eager helpmates, booking their spouses’ massages and mastering complicated cooking techniques.
But many of the wives say their husbands approach parenthood differently than women do. The stay-at-home mothers in Rye often congregate at spinning or yoga classes, but their male counterparts all seem to have a hobby involving a boat: sailing, building wood kayaks and, in Mr. Langley’s case, depicting fishing dinghies and half-finished hulls in his paintings. Despite their wealth, the men seem largely resistant to relying on nannies and babysitters, facing down screaming toddlers and constant meal preparation with go-it-alone stoicism.
Brandee McHale, a managing director of Citigroup’s charitable foundation, says her husband, a former Marine, does not multitask, noting that for him, “Laundry is an activity.” But she also appreciates that he will focus just as intently on tossing a football with their children.
A few women said that they resented the fact that their husbands did not cook or clean up, but that they had trouble telling them so, for fear that they would sound as if they were treating them like employees.
When Kristine Braden, also of Citigroup, was stationed in the Philippines, she knew that her husband was never going to devote himself to hosting parties for her clients or setting a perfect table, the way some wives of male bankers did. (The couple entertained at restaurants or at home together on weekends.) Few of the men are willing to take on corporate spouse duties, like attending or hosting Wall Street dinners with the alpha men who work at the banks.
The husbands often feel excluded from the social infrastructure that women have built up over generations to make stay-at-home life more manageable and fun. (“You want awkward? Try a swim play date,” one father said.) Every man interviewed said that many school notices, invitations and Girl Scout troop updates were still sent to their wives, a river they are constantly trying to divert.
When Ed Fassler, married to Marcie Fassler, a vice president of operations at PNC Financial Services in Pittsburgh, was helping out with a school wrapping paper sale, the mothers gathered to go over the order — and excluded him. “My husband wouldn’t be happy if you’re in my house with us,” the organizer told him.
In March, Mr. Langley is renting space to mount a show of his paintings, and his home studio is cluttered with canvases and taped-together snapshots of the local landscape. In a test run in September, he offered two paintings for sale at an art auction in town. It was a community charity event, the buyers friends from the neighborhood. When both pieces sold, the larger fetching $1,400, husband and wife both felt relief.
Maintaining Focus
In search of remedies, four of JP Morgan Chase’s top women decided to fan out across the country last summer to find out why too many women at the nation’s largest bank, and across the industry, still seemed somewhat stuck in their ascent.
For years, JP Morgan and other banks have tried recruitment and retention efforts aimed at women, including “speed mentoring” (Wells Fargo), wine tastings to get to know management (Morgan Stanley), efforts at hiring women who had taken time off to raise children (Goldman Sachs) and clubs for female bankers (Citigroup alone has 60).
When Diane Schumaker-Krieg, Ms. Black’s and Ms. Jan de Beur’s boss, worked at Credit Suisse years ago, the chief executive at the time, Mr. Mack, even flew her and other promising women to his home for a golf tutorial to help them network on the greens.
Still, women make up just 16 percent of bank executives, according to the consulting firm Catalyst, and only a tiny number run the huge revenue-generating businesses like investment banking and trading, barely a change from a generation before.
In their meetings with 2,500 women at seven JP Morgan offices, the four executives — including Mary Callahan Erdoes, the chief executive of the bank’s asset management division, and Marianne Lake, the chief financial officer — heard the same messages again and again.
Flex time allowing employees to work from home one or more days a week carried stigma, the women felt. Some said they were reluctant to chase promotions that could require moves upending their families. Many female bankers still quit after having children.
One morning last month, around the time Ms. Lake was departing for a similar round of meetings in Asia, Ms. Black arrived at her cluttered desk at Wells Fargo’s office in Charlotte, N.C., and slid on her headset to hear the latest Viacom earnings.
She tapped out a message for institutional investors, dropped in on a morning meeting to brief salespeople and traders, wrote a memo to clients about why she was downgrading Cisco’s debt, and gave a talk to the sales force on a new bond, all before the clock struck 9:30. During that sprint, she was focused entirely on her work.
Ms. Black and others say that is the real gift of a stay-at-home spouse: avoiding domestic distractions and competing better against other bankers, many of them men with stay-at-home wives.
If Ms. Black gets a call on Tuesday afternoon asking her to attend an out-of-town dinner the next night, she can go. Ms. Jan de Beur took two trips a week on average last spring. Candida P. Wolff, the head of global government affairs for Citigroup, often travels about one and a half weeks each month.
Being the breadwinner often means being taken more seriously in the workplace, they have learned. When one former banker was interviewing at a private equity firm, she said her prospective employers wanted to know what her husband did and seemed pleased that he had a low-paying but flexible job and handled more parenting duties. It dawned on her that the presumption men had often benefited from — that they would not be diverted by household demands — was finally applying to her too.
On the home front, the women cast the deciding votes on major financial decisions. “It’s not like when you and I were growing up and Dad made all the decisions, but I still control the purse strings,” Ms. Black said.
At Wells Fargo’s modernist tower on Park Avenue, Ms. Schumaker-Krieg, the global head of research, economics and strategy for the bank, is making new recommendations on how to retain and advance female employees. She has spent decades persuading women on her team not to quit, even when they are put on bed rest during pregnancy or give birth to a child with special needs. And she would like others in the industry to follow suit.
She acknowledges that part of the problem is the fundamental nature of the business: the ceaseless race to score the big deals and anticipate market moves. Soon she will complete year-end tallies, ranking the research analysts, including Ms. Black and Ms. Jan de Beur, against their competitors and each other.
Some of the women with stay-at-home husbands are her top performers. When she calls those men “the wind beneath our wings,” she sounds both kind and calculating; the more domestic responsibility the men are willing to assume, the more their wives can help the bank make money.
“It’s easy to slide into irrelevance by backing off just a little,” she warned.
Hannah Fairfield contributed research.
Source: NYTimes.com

Friday, December 6, 2013

Russian diplomats accused of $1.5M Medicaid fraud

NEW YORK (AP) — Dozens of current or former Russian diplomats and their spouses enjoyed luxury vacations and spent tens of thousands of dollars on concert tickets, fine clothing and helicopter rides as they lied about their incomes to get the U.S. government to pay their health care bills with money meant for the poor, federal prosecutors said Thursday.
The diplomats were among 49 individuals charged in a complaint unsealed in federal court in Manhattan, though no arrests were made and only 11 of the diplomats and their spouses remained in the United States. The complaint said Medicaid, a health care program for the poor, lost about $1.5 million in the scheme since 2004.
"Diplomacy should be about extending hands, not picking pockets in the host country," U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara told a Manhattan news conference. He called it "shameful and systemic corruption."
Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in remarks carried by the Interfax news agency that "we are bewildered by making the information about accusations of alleged tax and other offenses by Russian embassy personnel available to the media."
"It's not clear why the relevant agencies have considered it possible to make these accusations public before discussing them through diplomatic channels," he said.
"We can't make any comment on that until we receive a clear explanation of the charges against our citizens from the U.S. authorities," Ryabkov added.
Russian officials at the United Nations did not immediately comment.
The defendants include employees of Russia's consulate and its mission to the U.N., as well as trade representative, according to the criminal complaint.
The complaint alleges that the defendants submitted fraudulent applications for medical benefits for pregnancies, births and care for young children. Federal prosecutors said the diplomats qualified for Medicaid benefits by underreporting their income, often by tens of thousands of dollars.
Bharara said it was a case "we would be prosecuting and making arrests in, but for immunity." Still, he added, participation in crimes by diplomats generally leads to expulsion from a country.
"Being a diplomat does not give you the right to commit health care fraud," said George Venizelos, head of the FBI's New York office. He said 25 current and former diplomats and 24 of their spouses joined with dozens of co-conspirators not identified in court papers to carry out the fraud.
"The defendants selfishly took advantage of a health care system designed to help the unfortunate," Venizelos said.
In court papers, FBI agent Jeremy Robertson described an 18-month investigation, saying investigators had discovered a pattern of falsified applications.
He said 58 of the 63 births attributed to Russian diplomats and their spouses in New York City between 2004 and 2013 were funded through Medicaid, which is largely federally funded but includes money from state and local governments.
Robertson wrote that the diplomats and their spouses generally underreported household income to an amount below the applicable Medicaid eligibility level, and some of them lied about the citizenship status of their children to obtain continuing health coverage for them.
Meanwhile, the diplomats and their spouses spent tens of thousands of dollars on vacations, fancy watches, expensive jewelry and designer clothing at luxury retail stores including Bloomingdale's, Tiffany & Co., Jimmy Choo, Swarovski and others, the court papers said.
The complaint said they also spent tens of thousands of dollars on electronic merchandise at Apple Inc. stores and elsewhere. Authorities said they also bought concert tickets, robotic cleaning devices and chartered helicopters.
Court papers noted that prior to June 2011 Russian diplomats including some of the defendants received their salaries in cash. The complaint said diplomats underreported their incomes to qualify for Medicaid but gave more accurate descriptions of salaries to qualify for credit cards.
Charges in the criminal complaint included conspiracy to commit health care fraud, conspiracy to steal government funds and make false statements relating to health care matters.

Source: USAToday.com


Thursday, December 5, 2013

What to do if you became a subject of Medicaid Fraud Investigation in New York

Many of my clients recently received Medicaid Fraud Investigation letter from Human Resources Administration, Bureau of Fraud Investigation.  If you do not qualify for the Medicaid Benefit and you may have made false statements about the your income, your marital status, your living arrangements, or in other words your actions were not in accordance with legal requirements of Medicaid Benefits, you will receive a Fraud investigation letter telling you that you are under investigation for Medicaid Fraud and that you need to appear for an Interview with an Investigator.

Upon receipt of such letter, it is imperative that you contact an attorney IMMEDIATELY.  Remember, in order to qualify for the most Medicaid programs in New York City, you have to be New York City Resident and you have to be financially eligible. Very often such cases have criminal consequences. Make sure to protect yourself and your family from being criminally charged and imprisoned for something that could be resolved by a professional attorney.

When you apply for Medicaid, you fill out an application, and you are expected to disclose all sources of income, not just from your work, but also from any other source.  It may be the rental income that you have, or any gifts that you receive or any dividends from a business.  Moreover, if your income or marital status changes, you are required to report all changes immediately to the Medicaid Office and not wait until your Medicaid certification expires.

If you are already a Medicaid recipient and a discrepancy with the facts of your case turn up, you will become a target of a Medicaid Fraud Investigation. If you have been a target of an Investigation, your case would be assigned to an Investigator with a Bureau of Fraud Investigation (BFI).  There are several steps or actions that they can conduct:

-          Investigation can take from weeks to months
-          Investigators gather all information they can about
-          They may contact your employers
-          They may contact your neighbors
-          They may contact your tenants
-          They may follow you
-          They may take photos of your business, your home, and your cars
-          They may contact the DMV; verify your address and your car registration,
-          They may use specialized search to look up property purchase and mortgage information.

At some point, the investigator will call you in for an Interview.  Many people don’t know their legal rights, and in this case, how to act, if you receive a letter from Investigator. You may feel like being under pressure, you may start talk with investigator to clarify the situation, but this is the wrong way to do. Everything that you say to an Investigator, every statement that you make, the Investigator may use against you and you can be prosecuted.  Besides you can assume that the Investigator has a lot of information about you. However they still want you to come in and hope to get some self-incriminated statements or get some harder to obtain documents, such as your tax returns, or any other missing pieces to build their case against you.

Important thing is, do not speak with them, you don’t have an obligation to speak with them directly. In this case you need professional help from attorney, who has better experience and knows such cases, how to handle and to protect your legal rights and, the most important thing how to avoid prosecution and all of the criminal consequences.

For example: One of our clients, who received such letter, is a very well established person. He owns a house, where he lives with his family, two cars and runs his own business. Attorney Inna Fershteyn managed to completely close the case without any financial or legal consequences for the client. Another example is when a family was investigated for Medicaid Fraud and during the interview it turned out that this is their second investigation, which is considered to be second degree offence and is definitely can become a criminal case. Attorney Inna Fershteyn settled the case so that the clients only had to pay a fine and avoided any criminal prosecutions and therefore kept their record clean.

When you call Law Office of Inna Fershteyn and Associates at 718-333-2394 we will contact Investigator to shut down any communications between investigator and client, we will meet with Investigators to work out deal, and bring case to settlement before case is referred to district attorney’s office.

If you are a target of a public benefits fraud investigation, do not take any chances and call the lawyer. Your case may be relatively easy to resolve. Do not make it worse by speaking with an Investigator, you have no duty to speak with them, protect yourself and call us today, we will answer your questions and show you what can be done. 


Law Office of Inna Fershteyn and Associates, P.C.
1517 Voorhies Ave, 4 Fl
Brooklyn, NY 11235
tel. 718-333-2394
fax. 718-701-8859