I have come across this problem a few times.
Some of this is about IP insurers taking a self-interested bullying approach to claimants in the hope that they will go away.
MEDICAL EXAMS.
In relation to medical examinations there is probably a condition in the insurance contract obliging you to submit to medical examinations by their medical referee. Sadly, some of these referees would be better described as hit-men as some have objective bias in relation to certain types of conditions.
DOCUMENTS.
My first port of call would be to see the written terms of the sick pay / ill health / income protection as provided by your employers.
Next, I would want to see the terms of the insurance contract.
Technically, you are not the policyholder but you are probably an insured person subject to the terms and conditions of that contract.
Much flows from these two sources.
PROOF.
In claims of this type it is for the claimant to prove that an insured event has occurred.
The standard of proof is the civil standard of the balance of probabilities i.e. at least 50% more likely than not.
IMHO a clear and confirmed diagnosis of the condition from a consultant neurologist should outweigh that of a GP who, like some of them, has a post-graduate specialism in occupational medicine.
The trouble is that some insurers will see a report from "their" "independent" doctor as enough to justify termination of benefit where that opinion suits their convenience.
OMBUDSMAN.
You may have to consider a complaint to the Financial Services & Pensions Ombudsman.
This is not a soft option. Any finding they make is legally binding on the parties to the dispute.
Any of the parties can appeal a FSPO finding by way of a rather onerous High Court case.
I would threaten but reserve this option for now.
LINK
https://www.fspo.ie/
SOLICITOR.
You may have to consider instructing a solicitor to pursue this for you.
A sufficiently strong originating letter that shows resolve not to be pushed around might resolve it.
WHAT WOULD I DO IN YOUR POSITION ?
Write to the insurers and demand a written justification for and explanation of their position.
Point out that you have submitted medical evidence of a sufficient degree of medical expertise, competence and standing to establish proof that an insured event has occurred and that your evidence is to the required standard of proof.
Threaten that in the absence of a satisfactory response you will reserve the right to instruct a solicitor to pursue this for you and or you may consider a formal complaint to the FSPO.
P.S. - ARBITRATION.
I forgot to say to check the policy wording for an arbitration condition.
If there is one it probably compels that the matter be referred to arbitration and that it ousts alternative legal remedies.
If arbitration is to be considered it would be wisest to instruct a solicitor as the procedure has technical complexities.
And finally, don't let the underwriters ground you down... I had another word for underwriters but I don't want to be banned.. :mad: