Mortgage Modification And Foreclosure: FTC Filing Lawsuits And Sending Warning Letters

The Federal Trade Commission announced on April 6, 2009 a crackdown on fraud and deception by mortgage modification and home foreclosure rescue companies. The FTC is seeking to halt the proliferation of these mortgage relief offers – which target distressed and vulnerable consumers who are delinquent or facing foreclosure.

The FTC has filed numerous criminal and civil cases. In addition, the FTC sent a warning letter out to over 70 companies in the past few weeks who they suspect of engaging in deceptive marketing mortgage loan modification or foreclosure rescue services. A copy of the warning letter can be seen at: http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/04/090406warningletter.pdf

On February 2, 2009, the California State Bar has also issued an "Ethics Alert" regarding legal services to distressed homeowners and foreclosure consultants on loan modifications.

The State Bar expresses the opinion that there is evidence that some foreclosure consultants may be attempting to avoid the statutory prohibition on collecting a fee before any services have been rendered by having a lawyer work with them in foreclosure consultations. The State Bar opines that many of the proposed relationships between these foreclosure consultants and lawyers could violate the Rules of Professional Conduct and other ethical rules and, therefore, could result in lawyer discipline. The State Bar's stated purpose of the Ethics Alert is to remind California lawyers of several ethics rules that may apply in the event a foreclosure consultant or another non-lawyer requests assistance from a lawyer and/or refers potential distressed homeowner clients to the lawyer.

A copy of this Ethics Alert can be seen at:

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/pdfs/ethics/Ethics-Alert-Foreclosure.pdf

California law specifically addresses foreclosure consultants and restricts their activities; among other things, they are prohibited from collecting upfront fees for their work. (See California Civil Code Section 2945 and following). However, because attorneys are permitted to accept advance fees, they are in demand by some loan modification businesses. (Licensed brokers also may accept advance fees under certain circumstances.)

Attorney Commentary: Companies or individuals who are engaged in this business need to be aware of the law and ensure that they are compliant with federal and state law. The FTC is not waiting for consumer complaints and sent the warning letter to companies that were discovered on the Internet by a review of their advertisements or websites. Anyone working in the area of loan modification should be especially careful to be fully compliant with the law. Attorneys working in this area with loan modification consultants should also be mindful of fee splitting issues, referral fee issues and the aiding and abetting of the unlicensed practice of law. Licensed brokers should have similar concerns about being compliant with the law.

Scott Drexel, the State Bar’s chief prosecutor, says that for the last three months, the bar has received 50 complaints each day — about 950 complaints a month — about lawyers involved in some way with the foreclosure crisis. While the complaints are varied, Drexel said the most common concerns lawyers who lend their name to a loan modification operation but non-lawyers do most of the work. The non-lawyers get fees upfront through the lawyer and either do not complete the modification or do it incompetently. As a result, he said, the client loses his or her money.

Any questions or comments should be directed to: tgreen@greenassoc.com. Tracy Green is a principal at Green and Associates in Los Angeles, California. The firm focuses its practice on the representation of individuals, licensed professionals and businesses in civil, business, administrative and criminal proceedings.

Sexual Misconduct Allegations Against Physicians And Health Care Providers: How To Avoid Them - Risk Management

Allegations of sexual misconduct against California physicians and health care providers have become more frequent in recent years. Such allegations are made against providers by their patients, by individuals who believe they have established a provider-patient relationship with the physician, the provider's staff, and even, on occasion, by another provider. Our office has represented physicians and other health care providers in many cases involving allegations of sexual impropriety or misconduct and most of these claims were false or greatly exaggerated.

The legal consequences of allegations of sexual misconduct are potentially severe and may even be career-ending if not handled properly. The physician or provider may face probation, suspension or revocation of his/her license, the loss of hospital privileges, and the inability to obtain professional liability insurance. Additionally, he/she faces suspension of participation in HMOs, PPOs, and networks established by insurance companies and other third-party payors.

Further, the Medical Board and other professional Boards and Bureaus take any allegations involving sexual misconduct quite seriously and often unwilling to settle them without a full hearing or having the licensee agree to terms of probation that often include a psychiatric or psychological examination. Where there is a weak case, the Board may simply charge unprofessional conduct involving patient boundaries where there is no physical contact or the contact cannot be proven.

Some of the cases we have seem ridiculous but they must be taken seriously and all of these cases led to interviews by the respective Boards.

--The physician assistant who was investigated because the patient complained that he placed a stethoscope near her left breast while checking her heart and moved it to different locations surrounding her chest.

--The gynecologist who was investigated because the patient complained that he performed the breast exam while she was lying down on the table and then performed the second half of the exam while he sat in the chair next to her and that the gynecologist "appeared" to derive some sexual gratification from performing the breast exam.

--The plastic surgeon who was investigated because the patient accused him of calling her "pretty" and asking her to dinner which she supposedly refused because he was married.

--The provider who was alleged to have an erection during a procedure and allegedly pressed himself against the patient on the table. The patient waited two years to make the complaint but it was still investigated.

--The gynecologist who was alleged to have gotten "sexual gratification" from a pelvic examination without any real evidence other than the patient's claim that he appeared to be flirting with her by making jokes.

--The male internist who is alleged to have made suggestive comments during a physical examination of another male.

In all these cases, the Board investigation was closed after we presented the medical file, a dictated summary of the patient history, written statements from office personnel, copies of who were the actual records and prepared the health care provider for the interview. A good portion of the preparation was to ensure the health care provider had a professional demeanor (even though all of them were upset at even having to be interviewed or investigated), were not upset emotionally and did not make any comments that would be less than helpful.

Providers must recognize that any patient can make a complaint to the Board alleging that he or she was the victim of a provider’s sexual misconduct. The licensing boards and bureaus will investigate all such complaints, interview the patient who is alleging sexual misconduct, review the patient’s medical records that were compiled by the accused provider, and interview the provider and other possible witnesses.

Think about the statistics of encountering a psychologically unstable patient: if an OB-GYN or plastic surgeon has 2,000 patients, what are the chances over the course of several years what are the chances that one of them will have some psychological issue or get upset when she has some personality disorder or the physician refuses to give her pain medications or terminates her as a patient? Then there are the allegations that can arise due to poor communication, cultural differences or being in a hurry.

What can physicians and health care providers do to avoid being the target of a sexual misconduct investigation and/or action? Here are some common suggestions we make to providers:

(1) Allow patients to disrobe and dress in private and offer cover gowns and appropriate drapes. Do not move any of the patient's clothing such as lift up a sweater or shirt in order to save time but offer the patient a gown. (Some providers do not practice these simple steps.)

(2) Improve your communication with the patient about the reasons for and methods of examinations. If you need to complete a full physical or examine an intimate area, explain what you are doing and why you are doing it.

(3) Have an office staff member (a chaperone) in the room whenever possible, especially during breast, pelvic and other intimate exams. Many providers feel this is unnecessary and an added expense and burden on their office staff. However, many women are offended (or think there is something wrong) if these exams are done without another person in attendance.

Having a chaperone present may make a patient reluctant to make a frivolous claim of sexual misconduct and, in the event allegations are made to Board, the chaperone’s testimony could prove vital. The physician must document in the patient’s chart the chaperone’s presence during the examination.

(4) At a minimum, have your office nurse or assistant ask your patient if he or she would prefer to have an attendant in the room. Document the denial of chaperone.

(5) If the patient declines a chaperone in the room during a physical exam, close the curtain for privacy but leave the door open. We have seen many allegations of the "door being closed" to insinuate that there is something improper.

(6) The provider must recognize that a patient may allege sexual misconduct of either the heterosexual or homosexual variety.

(7) A patient who exhibits inappropriate or suggestive behavior must never be examined without a staff person or other independent individual present. The physician should strongly consider transfer of the patient’s care to another physician, being sure to take the appropriate steps so that the patient has no ground to allege abandonment.

(8) Seek legal counsel as soon as you are aware of potential or actual allegations of sexual misconduct.

(9) Document in the patient’s chart any flirtatious, suggestive, or lewd behavior evidenced by the patient.

(10) Remember that it is always your professional responsibility to maintain appropriate boundaries even with difficult patients/clients. Where there are minor boundary violations, it is easier for a patient/client to make a claim of sexual misconduct. Seemingly innocent things like hugs, gifts, performing services for free, meeting for lunch or dinner outside the office unless it is in a group, jokes, talking about your or the patient/client's personal life can create boundary violations.

(11) Ask your office staff for input about procedures regarding physical exams with the intention of avoiding any risky procedures or making necessary changes. Your office staff may be more aware of how patients will view these examinations and are more aware of the "potential problem" patients.

(12) If your practice has a higher risk of these type of claims (plastic surgery patients and physicians spend time talking about bodies, looks, etc.), be especially mindful. The cost of having a medical assistant follow the physician around and being present (and document her presence in the chart) can free the physician up so he doesn't have to monitor himself when he says: "your breasts look fantastic" after the results of an enhancement surgery.

What Is California Law Regarding Sexual Relations With Patients Or "Sexual Exploitation" Of A Patient?

Here is the law in California that prohibits sexual relations with or sexual exploitation of patients. Business and Professions Code section 726 prohibits sexual relations with patients. The law reads:

"The commission of any act of sexual abuse, misconduct or relations with a patient, client, or customer constitutes unprofessional conduct and grounds for disciplinary action for any person licensed under this division. . . . This section shall not apply to sexual contact between a physician and surgeon and his or her spouse or person in an equivalent domestic relationship when that physician and surgeon provides medical treatment, other than psychotherapeutic treatment, to his or her spouse or person in an equivalent domestic relationship."

Although this section allows physicians to provide medical treatment to a spouse or domestic partner equivalent, physicians should be aware that they are required to practice medicine with the same degree of care and professionalism as they would for a "conventional" patient. If drugs are prescribed, there should be a good faith examination undertaken and documented. There is no exclusion from the requirement to keep an adequate and accurate medical record for a family member. Just remember, there should be no difference in how you treat your "spouse" patient versus how you treat your "office" patient.

Business and Professions Code section 729 prohibits sexual exploitation of a patient or client by a physician and surgeon or psychotherapist. It reads: "Any physician and surgeon, psychotherapist, alcohol drug abuse counselor or any person holding himself or herself out to be a physician and surgeon, . . . who engages in an act of sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, or sexual contact with a patient or client, or with a former patient or client when the relationship was terminated primarily for the purpose of engaging in those acts, unless the physician and surgeon, . . . has referred the patient or client to an independent and objective physician and surgeon, . . . or recommended by a third-party physician and surgeon, . . . for treatment, is guilty of sexual exploitation by a physician and surgeon, . . ." This violation is a public offense, which means it is a crime. A first offense constitutes a misdemeanor. A second conviction, or a case where there are two or more victims, is actually a felony.

Of interest, this law also includes the warning: ". . . in no instance shall consent of the patient or client be a defense. However, physicians and surgeons shall not be guilty of sexual exploitation for touching any intimate part of a patient or client unless the touching is outside the scope of medical examination and treatment, or the touching is done for sexual gratification." The issue will be what is meant for "sexual gratification"?

Similar to Business and Professions Code section 726, this section also does not apply to sexual contact between a physician and his or her spouse or person in an equivalent domestic relationship when that physician provides medical treatment, other than psychotherapeutic treatment, to his or her spouse, or spousal equivalent.

Beware Of The Catch-All Phrase Of Unprofessional Conduct. The Boards often use the catch-all phrase of "unprofessional conduct" for behavior that does not rise to sexual relations or gratification. This is why it is important to take steps well in advance of the first patient complaint or Accusation.

Any questions or comments should be directed Tracy Green, is a principal at Green and Associates in Los Angeles, California. The firm focuses its practice on the representation of licensed professionals and businesses in civil, business, administrative and criminal proceedings, with a specialty in health care providers and has handled numerous cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct.

Posted by Tracy Green, Esq.
Phone: 213-233-2260
Email: tgreen@greenassoc.com

Medi-Cal Tamper Resistent Prescription Pads: Are You Compliant?

Federal legislation fully effective October 1, 2008, required that in order for Medi-Cal outpatient drugs to be reimbursable by the federal government, all written, non-electronic prescriptions must be executed on tamper-resistant pads. The tamper resistant prescription pad requirement applies to all outpatient drugs, including over-the-counter drugs. It also applies whether Medi-Cal is the primary or secondary payer of the prescription being filled. This new law impacts all physicians, dentists, optometrists, nurse practitioners and other providers who prescribe outpatient drugs.

As outlined by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), to be considered tamper-resistant on April 1, 2009, a prescription pad must contain all three of the following characteristics: (1) One or more industry-recognized features designed to prevent unauthorized copying of a completed or blank prescription form; (2) One or more industry-recognized features designed to prevent the erasure or modification of information written on the prescription by the prescriber; and (3) One or more industry-recognized features designed to prevent the use of counterfeit prescription forms.

Prescribers may order tamper-resistant prescription pads from security prescription printer companies that have been pre-approved to produce the forms by the California Department of Justice and Board of Pharmacy. Providers will need their prescriber’s state license number and a copy of their DEA Registration when they place their order.

The directory of approved companies can be found at www.ag.ca.gov/bne/security_printer_list.php.

The federal requirement does not apply to:

(A) E-prescriptions transmitted to the pharmacy;

(B) Prescriptions faxed to the pharmacy;

(C) Prescriptions communicated to the pharmacy by telephone by a prescriber;

(D) Transfer of a prescription between two pharmacies, provided that the receiving pharmacy is able to confirm by facsimile or phone call the authenticity of the tamper-resistant prescription with the original pharmacy;

(E) Written orders prepared in an institutional setting (which include Intermediate Care Facilities and Nursing Facilities), provided that the recipient never has the opportunity to handle the written order and the order is given by licensed staff directly to the dispensing pharmacy;

(F) Drugs dispensed or administered directly to the recipient from or in the physician’s office or clinic;

(G) Emergency contraception dispensed by a pharmacist under protocol pursuant to section 4052.3 of the Business and Professions Code;

(H) Emergency fills, provided that the prescriber provides a verbal, faxed, electronic or compliant written prescription within 72 hours;

(I) Written prescriptions paid for by Medicare, a Medicare Part D plan or Medicare Advantage Plan, unless Medi-Cal fee-for-service is a secondary payer. Excluded drugs paid for by Medi-Cal must be executed on a tamper-resistant pad, or;

(J) Prescriptions paid for by Medi-Cal managed care entities as defined by 1932(a)(1)(B), provided that the drug is not carved out. Written prescriptions for drugs carved out of managed care must be executed on a tamper-resistant pad.

A prescriber may not know when fee-for-service is the secondary payer to private insurance or if a prescribed drug is carved out of managed care; therefore, Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) recommends that prescribers use tamper resistant prescription pads for all Medi-Cal recipients.

Any questions or comments should be directed to: tgreen@greenassoc.com.  Tracy Green is a principal at Green and Associates in Los Angeles, California. The firm has represented many Medi-Cal providers in compliance, administrative, qui tam, and criminal proceedings.  

Doctors Are Opting Out Of Medicare

The New York Times published an article on April 1, 2009 about how physicians -- particularly specialists including internists -- are opting out of Medicare. They are no longer accepting Medicare, either because they have opted out of the insurance system or they are not accepting new patients with Medicare coverage. The doctors’ reasons: reimbursement rates are too low and paperwork too much of a hassle. We also see another reason: up to 3 years later, there can be audits which seek overpayment for technical paperwork reasons even where the services have been provided.

For the article, see:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html

Auto Insurance Fraud: Attorney Commentary On Increased Number Of Cases And Effect Of Economic Pressure

The economy is pushing some people over the edge. We are seeing that as times get tougher people of all economic backgrounds are engaging in acts they normally wouldn't commit. For example, there is an increase in people abandoning, torching or damaging their own vehicles to collect insurance or to avoid payments. In other cases, people are submitting claims for auto accidents in which did not occur. This type of conduct is a crime and most false claims can be prosecuted as a felony. Further, insurance claim forms are often signed under the penalty of perjury.

In California, there is funding at the county District Attorney's Offices for these cases -- which makes prosecution more likely. Under the direction of the Insurance Commissioner, the California Department of Insurance makes funds available, as authorized by Section 18971 of the California Insurance Code, to the District Attorney’s Office for investigation and prosecution of automobile insurance fraud. The DA's Offices apply for grants and they are able to use these funds to pay for experienced prosecutors.

Here are four recent cases from the past month involving these types of false insurance claims. Remember that complaints contain only allegations against an individual and all defendants must be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

■ On April 1, 2009, Anthony Razo, a former Los Angeles police officer was accused of torching his 2005 BMW 745 Li, then reporting it stolen and filing insurance claim for the loss in January 2009. Mr. Razo was charged by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office in Case No. BA 354733 with five felony counts and two misdemeanors. The felony counts of insurance fraud, defrauding an insurer and arson on one’s own property pertained to the BMW.

■ On April 1, 2009, Teresa Turbyfill was charged with auto insurance fraud by the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office. According to the complaint, in November 2008, Turbyfill's husband left the scene of a collision after a hit and run accident in his 2005 Cadillac. He subsequently reported to the Morongo Sheriff's Office that he had been carjacked prior to the hit and run, and that his 2005 Cadillac had later been burned by the suspects and
destroyed in the fire. Teresa Turbyfill allegedly filed an insurance claim listing the vehicle as a total loss due to the arson. The complaint alleges that she did this even after having complete knowledge of her husband's alleged actions.

■ On or about March 27, 2009, Nick Alan Thompson was charged by the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office after an auto insurance fraud investigation. The complaint alleges that the owner of a 2007 Suzuki GSX600 motorcycle reported it as stolen for the purpose of insurance fraud. The motorcycle was allegedly given to Thompson so he could dispose of the motorcycle. The motorcycle was found in Thompson’s garage. Thompson was charged, booked and bail was set at $50,000.

■ On February 23, 2009, the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office filed felony insurance fraud charges against Paul Fiedler of Pomona. The complaint alleges that in October 2007, Fiedler was involved in a minor traffic accident in the City of Ontario. The police were not called and both parties exchanged information. At the time of the accident, Fiedler had a $1,000 deductible for collision repair to his vehicle on his Geico auto insurance policy. On the day of the accident, he went online to the Geico Insurance website and made a policy adjustment on his $1,000 deductible for collision and changed it to a $150 deductible for collision.

The next day, he again went on the Geico Insurance website and filed an online accident claim, indicating that the accident had occurred on October 26, instead of October 25. He also contacted the other driver, in an attempt to convince him to give a false statement to Geico regarding the date of the accident. The other driver refused to take part in changing the date of the accident and so advised Geico. Fiedler was arrested at his place of business, where he worked as a loss prevention officer. He was booked into custody and bail was set at $25,000.

Attorney Commentary: For those who have filed false claims, the best time to craft a defense is prior to the filing of charges. There are many tactics and strategies that can be done to help unwind bad decisions. Although only a small percentage of false claims are prosecuted, there is no way to know which ones will be prosecuted. We see cases involving smaller dollar amounts being prosecuted. This is especially true with insurance claims since the carriers and NICB will do most of the work in investigating and putting together the prosecution package and evidence for law enforcement.

If you have filed a false claim, have been served with a search warrant or know the claim has been assigned to the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) of the carrier, you should contact an attorney as soon as possible. The best advice is for you not to speak with any investigator (police or insurance) until you have retained counsel and created a strategy on how to handle the matter. Waiting until you are arrested is not the best time to create a strategy.

We see investigators taking arrested defendants to their office and interview them in order to obtain quick confessions. People think that this will help them when all it usually does is create a better case for the prosecution. There are times when cooperation makes sense but it is not after arrest when there is no type of immunity or cooperation agreement in place.

Posted by Tracy Green, Esq.  Any questions should be directed to Tracy Green, a very experienced Los Angeles insurance fraud attorney and Los Angeles fraud attorney. You can email her at tgreen@greenassoc.com or call her at 213-233-2261.

The firm focuses its practice on the representation of licensed professionals and businesses in civil, business, administrative and criminal proceedings. They have a specialty in representing professionals in criminal matters, including automobile insurance fraud, insurance fraud and other financial crimes in California and throughout the country. Their website is: http://www.greenassoc.com/

Completing Board Applications: Attorney's Guidelines

Seven Important Guidelines On Completing Board Applications And Renewals

When you are applying for a license (or renewing one) from the California Medical Board, State Bar, Department of Real Estate, Department of Pharmacy, Board of Registered Nursing or any other state agency or any employer that is required to report to state agencies or databanks (such as hospitals), all applicants need to remember the following basic guidelines:

1. When you sign the application, you are certifying that all the information is accurate. In most of the applications and renewal forms you are declaring under the penalty of perjury that all the information is true and correct. This means it is as if you are under oath and promising to tell the truth.

2. If you do not complete the form accurately, your application can be denied on the sole ground that you falsified the application and/or intended to deceive the agency.

3. Take the questions literally and do not rely on your own interpretation. Err on the side of being cautious. Be overinclusive and not underinclusive.

4. Some of the questions are vague or ambiguous. It is not unusual for board questionnaires to be somewhat ambiguous or to be subject to some level of subjective interpretation. It is always safer to err on the side of caution and full disclosure. If an applicant is unsure as to the interpretation of a question he or she should answer it both ways. We also suggest having an experienced licensing attorney review your application for language and explanations to ensure that it is accurate but setting forth your position in the best light. The time and expense is well worth the chance of being denied a license for intentionally misleading the licensing board.

For example, let us take a question from the Nursing Board's actual application:

Question: "Have you ever had disciplinary proceedings against any license as a RN or any health-care related license or certificate including revocation, suspension, probation, voluntary surrender, or any other proceeding in any state or country? If yes, please provide a detailed written explanation, including the date and state or country where the discipline occurred."

Ambiguity: The first part of the question asks about any "disciplinary proceedings" while the second half asks "where the discipline occurred." The question might seem to assume that it is only interested in cases where actual discipline was imposed.

Do NOT make this assumption. The safer and better course to follow is to set forth any actual accusations or disciplinary charges and if the case was dismissed or no discipline was imposed to state those facts.

5. Criminal Charges. The question that we see applicants harm themselves the most is the one regarding criminal charges. The disposition of criminal cases is often ambiguous and a review of original records is often necessary to know the proper way to answer these questions. We have had many cases where the applicant's failure to disclose the charge accurately resulted in denial of the license or the granting of a restricted license or probation being imposed and we are hired to handle the appeal or disciplinary charge. If the person had answered the question accurately -- the license would have been issued but the perceived deception created significant problems.

Case Example: Physician finished residency and applies for privileges at Los Angeles Hospital. He had disclosed an old driving under the influence conviction to the Medical Board. however, when he applied for privileges at the hospital, he did not disclose the conviction. The hospital ran a background check and denied his application for privileges on the ground that he was deceptive on his application. Under the law, the hospital was required to report the denial of privileges to the Medical Board of California. By the time we met him, the Medical Board filed an Accusation and this young physician had already entered into a Stipulated Settlement and Decision to be on probation for 3 years.

Here is a sample criminal charge question:

"Have you ever been convicted of any offense other than minor traffic violations? If yes, explain fully as described in the applicant instructions. Convictions must be reported even if they have been adjudicated, dismissed or expunged or if a diversion program has been completed under the Penal Code or Article 5 of the Vehicle Code. Traffic violations involving driving under the influence, injury to persons or providing false information must be reported. The definition of conviction includes a plea of nolo contendere (no contest), as well as pleas or verdicts of guilty."

Thus, if someone had been charged and there was a deferred entry of judgment where the case would be dismissed upon the completion of community service and having no further arrests for one year, it will probably be necessary to disclose that charge. Err on the side of caution.

6. Make sure the application is complete to avoid unnecessary delays. Read and re-read the requirements and have someone else review it for errors or omissions.

7. Rehabilitation. If in your youth or past, you had some criminal charges, discipline from employers or agencies, drug/alcohol issues, mental health issues or other life experiences that contributed to the prior conviction/discipline -- your application should reflect your rehabilitation and why you are not the same person that committed those errors and why it is unlikely that these issues will arise again.

We are often hired to assist a person in drafting the best application possible and creating a package that will help someone get licensed where there are past criminal convictions and disciplinary problems. The wonderful thing about the United States is the people can have second or even third acts in their life. The key is acknowledging the past problems and showing why you have earned the right to a license and there is a minimal likelihood that it will ever occur again.

Applicants must also submit a description of the rehabilitative changes in their life, which would enable them to avoid future occurrences. To make a determination in these cases, the Board considers the nature and severity of the offense, additional subsequent acts, recency of acts or crimes, compliance with court sanctions, and evidence of rehabilitation.

The burden of proof lies with the applicant to demonstrate acceptable documented evidence of rehabilitation. We create a package where we show that the applicant has met his or her burden.

Examples of rehabilitation evidence include, but are not be limited to:

• Detailed letter from applicant attached to the application describing the events at issue (prior criminal or disciplinary charges) and rehabilitative efforts or changes in life to prevent future problems.

• Letters of reference on official letterhead from employers, instructors, professionals in the same field, professional counselors, parole or probation officers, or other individuals in positions of authority who are knowledgeable about your rehabilitation efforts.

• Letters from recognized recovery programs and/or counselors attesting to current sobriety and length of time of sobriety, if there is a history of alcohol or drug abuse.

• Proof of community work, schooling, self-improvement efforts.

• Court-issued certificate of rehabilitation or evidence of expungement, proof of compliance with criminal probation or parole, and orders of the court.

• Support letters from others in the community who are knowledgeable about rehabilitation efforts, current skills and why they are supporting your application even though they know about the prior criminal or disciplinary case.

We help outline, draft and coordinate the letters and entire application package and provide an objective view of what the typical agency or bureau wants in the application. Often the applicant fails to realize that although there are many current licensees with problems and issues, in order to be licensed with some adverse history he or she needs to jump a hurdle and prove that he or she is not a disaster waiting to happen and that instead, will be a credit to the profession.

Conclusion: Your application and/or renewal application is one of the most important documents you can complete. If there are some areas of your past that are troublesome or cause you concern, it is well worth hiring an experienced attorney (even if only for a few hours) to assist you in handling these issues such as ordering the court records and drafting the explanation in an attachment. Remember the value of your license over the course of your lifetime. It is a very valuable asset often worth millions of dollars.

Any questions or comments should be directed to: tgreen@greenassoc.com.  Tracy Green is a principal at Green and Associates in Los Angeles, California. They focus their practice on the representation of licensed professionals and businesses in civil, business, administrative and criminal proceedings, with a specialty in health care providers.