To Mark from Idaho: Forgive me if I get this wrong (my brain injury = cognition), but it sounds like the 3rd guy knew more. If they all got the same results, and he writes your report, it will show you are not malingering, right? I would document the differences in their training so his opinion is weighted more heavily. Perhaps he can offer explanation as to why the others said what they said. Some of that may be cookbook manual stuff used in computerized scoring or inexperienced clinicians. If you find out that's it, you can reduce their credibility. Also, workman's comp paying extra for copies covers the cost of the copies and personnel's time while making them. If the payment doubled, there no way workman's comp will pay for that (I was a psychologist who did these evals). You can point out the possible bias due to payment, but the other side will probably point out a similar bias if you cash pay the third. So be careful. I hope this makes sense. I have long recovery to go! I wish you the best.