Workers Compensation Claims Editing and Proofreading Services

A warehouse worker develops a shoulder injury over two years of overhead lifting and files a claim describing constant pain and an inability to work. The claim is denied as not work-related. The worker's own description had said the pain "came on gradually" and never connected it to any particular task, shift pattern, or change in duties — so the file contains a real injury with no stated link to the job, which is the single thing the whole claim depends on establishing.

We edit what people write when claiming workers' compensation — injury reports and claim forms, descriptions of how an injury occurred, statements connecting duties to a condition, functional and return-to-work capacity statements, requests for reconsideration of denied claims, appeal submissions to compensation boards and tribunals, letters to case managers and employers, and chronologies of medical treatment and time off work. Our editors work on the description of how the injury happened.

The account of how the injury arose is what the entire claim rests on, and its failure is an honest description of pain that never connects the pain to the work. We work through these so the specific duties are described with the physical action, the weight, the height, the repetition and the hours — reaching above shoulder height roughly forty times an hour for six-hour stretches — rather than described as heavy lifting, since a decision-maker matching your duties against a mechanism of injury needs the actual movement; so any change is identified with its date, given that a new shift pattern, a broken piece of equipment or a colleague's departure that doubled your workload is frequently the strongest evidence in a gradual-onset claim and is rarely mentioned; so what you reported, to whom and when, is listed as a dated sequence, because a delay in reporting is read as evidence the injury came from elsewhere unless the record shows what you actually did; so your account uses the same terms as your medical records where they describe the same thing, since a mismatch between how you describe your symptoms and how a doctor recorded them is treated as inconsistency rather than vocabulary; and so what you can still do is stated as precisely as what you cannot, given that a claim describing total incapacity is tested against surveillance and daily life, and a precise account survives that where an absolute one does not. Descriptions written this way connect the injury to the job.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including medical information, employment details and claim materials. We are editors rather than compensation advisers, advocates or medical professionals, and we offer no view on your injury, your entitlement or the merits of your claim. What we can do is make sure your description says clearly what you actually did and what happened to you.