6/7/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly as walking around his neighborhood four times a week, swimming two times a week, weightlifting three times a week, driving his car on Saturdays for one hour, riding his motorbike five times a week, playing basketball every Sunday, and fishing and doing some house repairs when he had the time. Interestingly, however, on February 18, 2010,[42] a mere nine days after his letter, Conag filed his complaint with the LA for disability benefits, presumably after he was told that he would not be rehired, although the reasons for his rejection are nowhere stated. It is not alleged that before he filed his complaint, he first sought payment of total disability benefits from the petitioners. In fact, it was only on March 20, 2010, three months after the petitioners declared him fit to work, that Conag obtained an assessment of unfitness to work from a doctor of his choice, Dr. Jacinto. Thus, when he filed his complaint for disability benefits, he clearly had as yet no medical evidence whatsoever to support his claim of permanent and total disability. But even granting that his afterthought consultation with Dr. Jacinto could be given due consideration, it has been held in Philippine Hammonia Ship Agency, Inc. v. Dumadag, [43] and reiterated in Simbajon[44] that under Section 20-B(3) of the POEA-SEC, the duty to secure the opinion of a third doctor belongs to the employee asking for disability benefits. Not only did Conag fail to seasonably obtain an opinion from his own doctor before filing his complaint, thereby permitting the petitioners no opportunity to evaluate his doctor's assessment, but he also made it impossible for the parties to jointly seek the opinion of a third doctor precisely because the petitioners had not known about Dr. Jacinto's opinion in the first place. Indeed, three months passed before Conag sought to dispute the company-designated physicians' assessment, and during this interval other things could have happened to cause or aggravate his injury. In particular, the Court notes that, after he collected his sick wage, Conag spent two months in his home province and engaged in various physical activities. Conag has no factual medical basis for his claim of permanent disability benefits According to the CA, there is no dispute that Conag suffered from spinal injuries designated as "Mild Lumbar Levoconvex Scoliosis and Spondylosis; Right S1 Nerve Root Compression," with an incidental finding of "Gall Bladder Polyposis v. Cholesterolosis," on account of his job as a bosun's mate, which is "associated with working with machinery, lifting heavy loads and cargo." The CA also found that he sustained his injuries during his employment with the petitioners.[45] The Court disagrees. A review of the petitioners' evidence reveals that both the CA and the LA glossed over vital facts which would have upheld the fitness to work assessment issued by the company-designated physicians. The petitioners cited a certification by the ship master, [46] which Conag has not denied, that the ship's logbook carried no entry whatsoever from March 28 to August 25, 2009 of any accident on board in which Conag could have been involved. Instead, Conag's medical repatriation form shows that he was sent elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61899 6/12