[firm] blog logo

Reminder: Employer Obligations Regarding Employee Life Insurance Coverage

In our prior blog post here, we discussed the case of Anastos v. IKEA Property, Inc., which highlighted the importance of an employer?ÇÖs understanding of how its group term life insurance coverage is impacted by changes in employment status, such as termination of employment, retirement, or a leave of absence. This understanding is necessary for the employer to correctly communicate to employees when life insurance coverage will end, when evidence of insurability will be required, and the requirements necessary to convert coverage. In Anastos, the employer drafted its retiree benefit plan to state that eligible retirees could continue life insurance and that, in most cases, coverage would be guaranteed with no medical certification required. When a retiree attempted to obtain this coverage, the employer admitted that its plan was misleading and that it could not obtain underwriting to provide that kind of life insurance continuation benefit. The retiree sued, and… Continue Reading

Inaccurate Leave of Absence Provisions May Lead to Stop Loss Carrier Denial of Claims

For employees on a leave of absence (?Ç£LOA?Ç¥) or a furlough, employers often extend group health plan coverage during the LOA or furlough for a prescribed time period. With regard to group health plans that are considered to be ?Ç£self-insured,?Ç¥ generally, the employer?ÇÖs reinsurer, or stop loss carrier, is only required to cover claims (above the policy?ÇÖs self-insured retention level) incurred for a covered person based on the written terms of the plan. In other words, the policy underwrites the coverage that is provided under the plan document. If extended coverage during a LOA or furlough is not expressly set out in the plan document, a stop loss carrier could seek to deny claims incurred during that period. It is thus recommended that employers with self-insured plans review their health plan documents to ensure consistency with administrative practices regarding coverage during LOAs and furloughs and coordinate as necessary with the… Continue Reading

Have You Notified Participants of Extended Deadlines?

As noted in our prior post here, the U.S. Departments of Labor and Treasury recently issued a notice requiring all employee health and welfare benefit plans to disregard the period from March 1, 2020 until 60 days after the announced end of the COVID-19 National Emergency (or other announced date) when determining the deadline to request HIPAA special enrollment, elect COBRA coverage, make a COBRA premium payment, notify the plan of a COBRA qualifying event or determination of a disability, file a benefit claim or appeal, or request an external review of a benefit claim denial. Although the notice did not address whether plan participants needed to be notified of these extended deadlines, plan administrators should be aware that they likely have a fiduciary duty to accurately convey this information to participants. For example, a COBRA election notice that states a deadline to elect or make premium payments without mentioning… Continue Reading

Another Court Holds that ERISA Benefit Denial Notices Must Disclose Limitations Period for Judicial Review

Consistent with recent decisions from the Third and Sixth U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, the First Circuit recently held that a notice of benefit denial under ERISA must include a statement of any time limits for filing a claim for judicial review in order for such limits to be enforceable. In Santana-Diaz v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., a participant in an employer-sponsored disability benefits plan subject to ERISA (the ?Ç£Plan?Ç¥) filed a civil action under ERISA Section 502 after he had exhausted the Plan?ÇÖs internal appeals process and received a final benefit denial letter which did not mention the Plan?ÇÖs three-year limitations period for filing a lawsuit. The district court dismissed the participant?ÇÖs lawsuit as being time-barred because it was filed beyond the Plan-imposed three-year limitations period (of which the participant had notice through the group policy booklet). In reversing, the First Circuit interpreted the ERISA claims regulations as requiring… Continue Reading

October 2021
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Archives