Does A Letter From A Disability Insurance Company Misstating Policy Language Modify The Terms Of A Disability Insurance Policy?
Occasionally, the issue arises of a disability insurance company misstating the terms and coverage of a disability insurance policy, either verbally or in written correspondence. Most of the time the misstatement is a simple mistake, and due to the claim specialist failing to proofread their letter. Sometimes the misstatement is made on a mistaken belief. Generally, misstatements made in correspondence from a disability insurance company do not amend or alter the disability insurance policy or plan, if the policy or plan is governed by ERISA. The bottom line is that a claimant should always rely on the language in their disability policy. Lets take a look at a recent lawsuit against Unum which dealt with a claimant trying to enforce a letter from UNUM rather than the language contained within the actual disability policy.
Most Disability Insurance Policies Contain Language Concerning How Amendments to the Disability Insurance Policy Are Made
A disability insurance policy often contains specific language concerning how the disability insurance policy can be changed or amended. The purpose of this language is to prevent the terms and conditions of the disability insurance policy to be changed by a simple letter from a claim representative, or by the insured themselves attempting to write in amendments to the insurance contract. Obviously, this type of language is included in order to protect the integrity of the agreement between the insurance company and the insured and to protect the parties. For instance, the language in one policy insured by The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company a/k/a Unum, states that no change in the policy will be effective until approved by a Company officer, and the approval must be noted on or attached to the Policy itself. Despite language to this effect conflict still arises if a letter from the disability insurance company misstates the coverage of the insured.
Maryland Doctor Told that Letters From the Disability Insurance Company Do Not Amend the Disability Insurance Policy
The issue concerning letters from the disability insurance company misstating coverage and the effect on a disability insurance policy governed by ERISA, was addressed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a case involving a Maryland doctor, Dr. Bernard Band, and his disability insurance company, The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company. At the time that Dr. Band purchased his disability insurance policy he was interviewed by Mr. Kevin Turney, an agent of Paul Revere, who hand-wrote an application for disability insurance on behalf of Dr. Band. The maximum benefit period under the policy is determined by the birth date of the insured. In completing the application Mr. Turney inadvertently misstated Dr. Band’s date of birth, making him one year younger than he actually was. Dr. Band blindly signed the application, confirming its accuracy and not realizing the mistake.
Approximately four years later, Dr. Band became disabled, and submitted a claim for disability benefits. Shortly after the submission of the claim, Paul Revere approved the disability claim and began paying disability benefits. Two years into his disability claim Dr. Band inquired with Paul Revere as to when his benefit period would expire. Going by the mistaken birth date indicated in his original application for insurance, which made him 61 years old at the time of disability, Paul Revere issued a letter to Dr. Band representing that his disability benefits would be paid for a maximum of 48 months. Dr. Band’s actual age at the time of disability (62) actually only entitled him to 42 months of disability benefits. Approximately six months later Paul Revere caught its mistake and wrote Dr. Band a letter advising that the maximum benefit period was 42 months. After paying for the full 42 months, Paul Revere stopped paying benefits, prompting Dr. Band to sue Paul Revere for the remaining 6 months of benefits.
Initially Court Rules that Dr. Band Was Entitled to the Additional Six Months of Benefits
Initially the federal court concluded that Dr. Band was entitled to 48 months of benefits. The federal court reached this decision for three reasons: 1) Paul Revere had assured Dr. Band that he was to recover 48 months of benefits; 2) the misstatement of age was done wholly by Mr. Turney, and he was an agent of Paul Revere; and 3) it found that Paul Revere had waived its misstatement of age provision. It also relied on the common law principles of waiver and estoppels to find in favor of Dr. Band.
Appellate Court Finds that Paul Revere’s Letters Were Not Formal Amendments to the Policy And Therefore Benefits Were Only Payable for 42 Months
Paul Revere appealed the lower federal court’s ruling and ultimately prevailed in its appeal to limit Dr. Band’s benefits to 42 months. First the appellate court determined that the common law principles of estoppels and waiver did not apply in an ERISA case. Second, Paul Revere’s letters did not formally amend the policy since formal amendment procedures as required by the policy and ERISA were not taken. Finally, the appellate court disagreed with the lower court that Paul Revere’s actions in any way waived its misstatement of age provision, and that Paul Revere did not intend to waive its rights.
Had this case been governed by state law and not ERISA the results may have been different. Dr. Band would have likely stood a better chance of prevailing against Paul Revere. Unfortunately, ERISA strips and preempts many rights that policyholders have under state law. Under ERISA it is clear that a disability insurance company will likely get away with any misstatements or misrepresentations it makes concerning policy terms and coverage, and it is likely that the claimant will suffer damage as a result.
It is important to read your policy thoroughly, and to understand the terms and coverage. If there is something you do not understand, despite the holding in Dr. Band’s case, an explanation letter can be requested from the disability insurance company explaining the term or coverage issue. In the event the case is not governed by ERISA, the insured may be able to hold the insurance company to the explanation letter, and ultimately prevail in the event a dispute arises. This case was not handled by Dell Disability Lawyers.
Our lawyers have handled hundreds of claims against UNUM throughout the country. Contact us for a free consultation to discuss your claim with UNUM or any other disability insurance company.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Get Your Unum Disability Application Approved
Prevent a Unum Disability Benefit Denial
Negotiate a Unum Lump-Sum Settlement
Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.
Policy Holder Rating
Q: Does UNUM periodically review Group Long Term Disability Insurance claims/payments? For example, do they verify medical eligibility every five or ten years?
Q: My group long term disability insurance allows me to work part time up to 20% of my pre-disability earnings without affecting my benefit. If I take advantage of this, will Unum use this to deny my benefit?
Q: Unum discontinued the "long term Buy out option" in 2014. I was never aware of or informed of this action by Unum.
After appeal filed by Attorney Jay Symonds, UNUM overturned previous denial of long term disability benefits for South Carolina Nurse
Unum Overturns Original Decision to Deny Benefits to Disabled Account Manager Following Appeal Submitted by Dell Disability Lawyers Appeals Team
After appeal filed by Attorney Jay Symonds, UNUM overturned its previous denial of long term disability benefits for Colorado Plumber
Court Rules Plaintiff's Medical Records Was Replete With Evidence Supporting Claim of MS & Was Not A Pre-Existing Condition
After paying for 13 years Unum Denies Disability Benefits to Woman with Lyme Disease and Endometriosis
Inexperienced Lawyer Handles Unum Disability Lawsuit and Fails to Provide Evidence to Support Occupational Argument
Massachusetts court overturns Unum's decision to terminate disability benefits after paying for nearly ten years
Reviews from Our Clients
Very satisfied with the work of this team. Took well care of my case and took all the necessary time to be responsive and attentive when I had questions. Guided me through recovery and returning to normalcy. All thanks to Jason & Tabitha, thank you!
I’m extremely satisfied with the experience I have had with this firm from day one. The lawyer who has handled my case, Alex, is very efficient and attentive to all my questions and concerns. They are always aware of how my case has gone and they care about my health. I feel optimistic with them because they are very attentive during the process of my claim. I would not hesitate to recommend families and friends if in any situation they need their services. Kathleen as well has been very well and assisted me with this case. I highly appreciate everything they have done for me.
It’s unfortunate when disability insurance companies come after older disabled policyholders just to help their bottom line. It can be a living nightmare the damage they can do to a family. Dell Disability Lawyers are polite, understanding and knowledgeable. They call you back and answer any question you have no matter how unimportant it can be. The amount of stress they took off of myself and family was incalculable. I recommend them highly to take care of any disability case whether it be filing for benefits or reversing a claim decision. They are outstanding.
I could not have been happier or more appreciative of the hard work they performed on my behalf. I was well briefed on my case and it was closed in a timely manner with a financially successful resolution.
Mr. Symonds and Sonia as well as everyone else we have worked with throughout this process have been very helpful, professional and caring to our situation. We are very thankful to have this great team on our side.
Without them my LTD company was dropping my plan with me still suffering from my accident, even with doctor’s statements I’m still disabled. The LTD company didn’t want to advance my policy to the next stage of years of pay. Dell Disability Lawyers saved my policy, and helped to enforce the LTD company’s own policy (for its policy holder, me) that I would be covered still under the LTD policy I had paid for at my previous job, when my accident occurred. These lawyers know what they are doing and can help you too. LTD companies will try to drop you when you still need coverage just because they don’t want to pay on your policy anymore. Don’t let them break contract with ya because they are trying to get out of it. Hit em with legal action to ensure the continuation of your policy you paid for. Dell Disability worked very well for me and continue to do so.
I was denied long term disability benefits from The Hartford after being on it for years. I found Dell Disability Lawyers after doing research online. In a matter of days they responded and explained to me everything that would be done. Dell Disability Lawyers were able to settle my suit against The Hartford very quickly and responded to me quickly. I would definitely recommend this team of lawyers for anyone that is fighting for their disability insurance.
I have had nothing but a great experience with Dell Disability Law Firm. Mr. Alex Palamara and his team went above and beyond my expectations. They will respond to emails and phone calls in a timely manner. Thank you once again for taking my case.
This law firm is the best so far. MetLife denied me two times, they appealed two times for me and they won of course. So if you are on disability and want a chance at winning your case use this firm Dell disability lawyers, kind courteous understanding and they get the job done. You won’t be disappointed.