Alan C. Olson & Associates, s.c.
WEBLOG

Home
Attorneys
Contact Us
Site Map


Subscribe
RSS 2.0 feed
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to Bloglines
Add to your My Feedster
Add to your NewsGator
My MSN
What is RSS?

UNUM consents to $15,000,000 fine and process to correct denied claims back to 1997

Posted by: Alan Olson
October 30, 2006
Topic: UNUM consents to $15,000,000 fine and process to correct denied claims back to 1997

On September 2, 2003, a group of state insurance regulators formed a multistate examination to determine if the individual and group long term disability income claim handling practices of UNUM reflected "systemic unfair claim settlement practices" as defined in the Unfair Methods of Competition and Unfair Deceptive Acts and Practices in the Business of Insurance Model Act (1972) or NAIC Claims Settlement Practices Model Act (1990) pursuant to the procedures established by the NAIC Market Conduct Examiner’s Handbook.  Contemporaneously with the Multistate Examination, the United States Department of Labor (DOL) was conducting an investigation of UNUM pursuant to Section 504 of ERISA.

In response to a number of the concerns raised by the Regulators and DOL, UNUM finalized an agreement on December 22, 2004 named the "Regulatory Settlement Agreement, Targeted Multistate Disability Income Market Conduct Examination" ("Agreement") to pay a $15,000,000 fine and enter a Plan of Corrective Action.

UNUM's Plan of Corrective Action requires it to:

a. provide an effective Claim Reassessment Process for an identified class of claimants going back to 1997 who seek review of the earlier decision by an experienced claim unit formed solely for the purpose to (i) perform a first impression review of the claims using past and current information that is relevant to the claim decision and (ii) apply the improved claim handling process in a fair way to remedy deficiencies that may have affected the earlier claim decision;

b. follow regulatory standards, use best practices, and comply with state and federal laws and regulations; and

c. provide for oversight and ongoing monitoring by the Regulators and DOL, to ensure UNUM’s compliance with the improved claim handling process.

UNUM's Plan of Corrective Action involves examination of its claim files for evidence of "reliance on lack of 'objective' data or 'objective' medical information as a basis for claim denial or termination of benefits.  "When multiple conditions or co-morbid conditions are present, Company personnel will ensure that all diagnoses and impairments are considered and afforded appropriate weight in developing a coherent view of the claimant’s medical condition, capacity and restrictions/limitations."

In conducting all reviews, including but not limited to reviews conducted pursuant to the Claim Reassessment Process, UNUM must give significant weight to evidence of an award of Social Security disability benefits as supporting a finding of disability, unless UNUM has compelling evidence that the decision of the Social Security Administration was (i) founded on an error of law or an abuse of discretion, (ii) inconsistent with the applicable medical evidence, or (iii) inconsistent with the definition of disability contained in the applicable insurance policy.  This deference to disability decisions by the SSA is consistent with federal case law holding that inclusion of the SSA determination is necessary for an informed judgement by the court.

In the event that UNUM fails to meet the Standard for Compliance for the Plan of Corrective Action, UNUM will be required to pay a fine of $145,000,000.

I will describe in a future posting the process I have been following to recover long-term disability benefits on behalf of my clients under UNUM's Plan of Corrective Action.

Alan Olson


Alan C. Olson practices disability law from his offices in New Berlin, Wisconsin, and throughout the United States.  AOlson@Employee-Advocates.com

        

Topics

A disability insurance carrier's use of the same case manager to deny each internal appeal violates the claimant's right to a full and fair review.
Bad Faith Denial of Long-Term Disability Claim Warrants Award for Emotional Distress, Loss of Reputation, Economic Injury, Punitive Damages, and Attorney Fees
Court Denies Reliance Standard?s Untimely Request For Medical Exam
Court Finds MetLife Arbitrary and Capricious in its Denial of LTD Benefits
Diaz finally gets his day in court against Prudential
Disability Carriers Must Pay the Price for Their Arrogance in Denying Benefits
Disability Insurer Repeatedly Refuses to Pay for Surgery, Breaks Settlement Agreements, and Postpones Treatment Causing Claimant Anxiety Resulting in $1.5M Verdict
Disability Insurers Must Now Feel Your Pain
Disability Plan Documents With Inconsistent Definitions of "Disability" Will be Construed in Favor of the Employee
Disability carriers must provide for a full and fair review including the four cornerstones of Reason, Reference, Description, and Explanation, pursuant to ERISA.
Disability claims-handling systems put profit before disability benefits
Employees Cannot be Fired Because of Expensive Medical Insurance Claims
Evidence of Disability Found in Bedrock of Social Security Disability Determination
Evidence suggesting a mistake in diagnosis, lack of detail, and unexplained contradictions are not fatal to LTD claim
How long before I receive benefits?
How to Prove your Disability to the Insurance Company
How to penetrate the LTD carrier's administrative record for evidence of its incompetence and bad faith.
Insurance Company May Allow Extra Time For New Medical Evidence
Insurer's Cancellation of Health Coverage After Cancer Diagnosis Results in $9M Award
LTD Carrier That Exceeds 45 Day Review Period is Held to Stricter Standard
LTD carrier's failure to produce the entire administrative record may result in a ruling favorable to the claimant.
Long-Term Disability Standard Stricter After 24 Months
Many people who apply for Social Security Disability also apply for Long-Term Disability benefits through a private insurer
NFL Retirement plan refuses to pay disability to former football player in violation of ERISA.
People Denied Long-Term Disability Benefits Need Make-Whole Remedies
Remember To Use SOAP To Prove Your LTD Claim
Sufferers of CFS or Fibromyalgia Cannot Be Denied Their Long-Term Disability Benefits by an Insurer Without a Specialist
U.S. Supreme Court Affirms That MetLife?s Conflict of Interest And Employee?s SSD Award Supported Reversal of MetLife?s Denial of LTD Benefits
UNUM consents to $15,000,000 fine and process to correct denied claims back to 1997
UNUM held ?arbitrary and capricious? for ignoring claimant?s subjective evidence of her pain and the opinions of her treating doctors
What does it mean to be disabled under the Social Security Administration?
What is it worth? The two most prominent questions asked regarding Social Security.



Archives

October, 2006



The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.

Copyright © 2008 by Alan C. Olson & Associates, s.c. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.