Here is an excellent video of how insurance companies use ERISA to swoop in and take injury victim’s recovery money.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) of 1974 is a federal law that protects employee benefit plan participants and their beneficiaries. Although it was initially aimed at safeguarding retirement plan benefits, it has seen a significant evolution over the years and now encompasses a variety of benefit plans, including health insurance. The complex nature of ERISA, however, has been widely exploited by insurance companies to deny injury victims their rightful benefits.

ERISA’s heart lies in its preemption clause, which supersedes all state laws relating to the employee benefit plans. Unfortunately, this has allowed insurance companies to bypass the more favorable state laws and regulations designed to protect injury victims. Since ERISA litigation happens at the federal level, it makes it extremely challenging and costly for claimants to fight against insurance giants.

One of the major ways insurance companies use ERISA to deny claims is by utilizing the law’s ‘discretionary clause’. This clause gives the insurance provider the absolute discretion to interpret the terms of the policy and decide whether the claimant is eligible for the benefits or not. Insurance companies can thus manipulate the presence of this clause to their advantage and unjustly restrict or deny benefits.

Additionally, insurance companies may delay proceedings claiming they require additional evidence or paperwork to process the claims. However, under ERISA guidelines, once a claim is denied, a claimant cannot introduce new evidence or testimonies at a later appeal stage. This tricky loophole allows insurance providers to avoid paying benefits.

Insurance companies may also capitalize on ERISA’s lack of punitive damages. ERISA does not provide emotional distress compensation or penalties for insurance bad faith. Even if an insurance company is found guilty of wrongfully denying a claim, it is not held accountable beyond paying the original benefits owed – making it more profitable for them to attempt to deny valid claims.

ERISA, therefore, although formulated with the intention of safeguarding employee rights, its complicated provisions have been misused by insurance companies to delay, reduce, or deny rightful claims of injury victims. It is advisable for individuals to navigate this complex system alongside experienced ERISA lawyers to ensure they are not stripped of their rightful benefits.

What Our Clients Say

This is a long review of our experience but the summary is: Andrew is by far the best Austin personal injury lawyer there is and we couldn't have found a better fit to represent us in our case!Andrew Traub represented us when we were hit at a school while dropping off our kids. My wife was ran over and ended up with severe leg scarring, I injured my jaw, and my son had severe emotional trauma.We spent months interviewing attorneys and decided Andrew Traub was the best injury attorney in Texas for our case. My wife's portion of the case wasn't hard to get max ($350,000) given her injuries; however, my son's emotional trauma was a VERY complex issue given it's not as easy to establish as physical injury.USAA (her insurance) and State Farm (our insurance) repeatedly denied any compensation to him. Andrew, using his expertise, was eventually able to get the pay max ($350,000) on his claim! My jaw injury was a physical injury but, ironically, USAA kept saying it was from my military service. In the end USAA did pay the policy limit ($100,000) for my jaw injury (our under-insurance had already paid out max).But, what I feel is just as important, is the way Andrew treated us. He was always keeping us in the loop and helping coordinate issues and care. He ensured we knew what to expect and rough estimates on time frames. He helped us set up a structured settlement where our son's money would almost double by the time he receives it.He was more than willing to help with the car damage side of the claim- which we had already don't but it would have been great not having to deal with it (we took our time interviewing attorneys given the complexity of the case).

5/ 5
R C - google

Contact Us

Contact Us
First
Last
Enter Email
Confirm Email
Please let us know what's on your mind. Have a question for us? Ask away.
Back To Top