Lately there’s been an onslaught of information crossing my desk indicating that some insurers are not being honest with the public. Of course, we all hope and trust that our disability insurers will be honest, the truth is that dishonesty is more profitable than just plain telling the truth.
Lying to your own insured base is not acting in good faith, nor is it acting in a fiduciary manner. Insurance companies are expected to be truthful, and when they aren’t, there’s usually no one watching, mostly because insureds are not well informed and don’t know they are being lied to, or because the law is likely to shrug and say, “it’s an insurance company what do you expect?
My top #1 lie told to a client was when The Standard actually put in writing to one of my clients that ERISA requires disability insurers to obtain copies of SSDI files and review them before making liability decisions. I couldn’t believe what I was reading, and it was beyond belief that a claims handler would actually put a lie like this in writing. After consulting with several attorneys, I was able to verify that ERISA says no such thing. When we asked the claims handler to provide us with the exact statue in ERISA law that required this, we were told they would not and they disavowed saying it, even though we had the original letter.
To be clear, ERISA DOES NOT require disability insurers to obtain SSDI files and review them before they make decisions. This is an untruth that really should have been reported to the DOL, but as I said, no one seems to care about the whoppers that are told in this industry. Insureds ARE NOT required to sign SSDI Authorizations and in fact, I don’t recommend it.
Unum group opts for my next choice of deceptions when it informs claimants they need the SSDI file copy “in order to give all favorable consideration to the claim.” WOW! That’s a tall tale if I ever heard one. Unum has various ever-changing objectives for chasing down SSDI files including: 1) recalculating SSDI awards and alleging new overpayments due 2) looking for form 831 showing the listings under which applicants are approved, and, 3) checking for mental and nervous designations so claims can be denied after 24 months.
None of these so-called “intents” have anything to do with giving claims favorable consideration. In fact, most of Unum’s objectives have to do with money, so “following the money” is always a great way to find out what Unum’s up to.
Finally, the grand champion of deceptive fraud here is MetLife who constructed a giant “tall tale” when it told a client the company couldn’t offer a settlement because California had a COVID Unfair Settlement Practices Act that prohibited settlements for all Plans and policies with CA jurisdiction, even if the insured had moved off to other states. WTH? Unlike The Standard that actually told the truth, “We don’t do settlements”, which was much appreciated by my Client, MetLife told a lie they knew could be easily fact-checked. Upon contacting the best known settlement attorney in CA, we were able to verify that there is no such law.
Although I could go on and on disproving statements made by disability insurers, I’m sure you get the picture. Today, as an insured, you should never rely on any information given to you, especially by claims handlers. Check out the information yourself, but don’t believe it, until you do. It is my belief that disability insurers have become so accustomed to lying that they simply forget that THE TRUTH WORKS just as well.
