United Healthcare Fined For Denying Claims For Chiropractic Treatment

The Missouri Department of Insurance conducted a market conduct examination of United Healthcare after patients and chiropractors filed complaints about the company improperly denying claims.  The Department of Insurance found United Healthcare violated state insurance laws by failing to evaluate the medical necessity of treatment before denying claims.  Pursuant to a settlement with the Missouri Department of Insurance, United Healthcare has agreed to reexamine at least 50,000 claims filed since 2004 by chiropractors who treated the company’s policyholders and will pay $536,000 in fines.

“When Missourians entrust their health coverage to an insurance company, they expect and deserve to be treated fairly and legally. We have taken this action to make sure that happens,” said John M. Huff, Missouri Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration.  “We believe the review of these 50,000 files may determine money is due to other providers and possibly consumers.”

For any chiropractic claims it finds were improperly denied, United Healthcare must reimburse the physicians for those claims, plus interest.  In some cases, consumers may have paid the bills, rather than the chiropractors.  Those consumers would be entitled to reimbursement directly from United Healthcare.

Update:  Two class action were recently filed by chiropractors against insurance companies that have tried to recover what they believe were unwarranted payments.  The first suit, filed in New Jersey Federal Court by five practitioners and three state associations, charges that Aetna made improper repayment demands and that its post-payment audit process violates the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”).  The class action also claims that certain Aetna clinical policy bulletins misclassify chiropractically accepted procedures as experimental and investigational.  The second class action, filed in Chicago by 15 practitioners and their state associations, accuses the BlueCross BlueShield Association and a number of its state-based licensees of similar wrongdoing.

If you are a chiropractor or a consumer with health insurance coverage, and believe that your chiropractic claim was denied improperly, please contact us to discuss your legal options.

California Court Finds Chiropractic Extended Treatment Contracts Unlawful And Unconscionable

A California court has severely criticized the use of chiropractic contracts in which patients pay in advance or agree to pay for many visits at a "discount" price, and held that two women were entitled to refunds from their chiropractor because their chiropractic extended treatment contracts were unconscionable. Chiropractors who offer these type of contracts typically tell their patients that long-term care is needed to prevent what they call "subluxation degeneration" (a mythical condition). Even if some treatment might be helpful, it is not possible to know in advance that a large specified number of visits will be needed.  In addition to excessive visits, these contracts often contain provisions intended to discourage quitting. Many of the contracts state that if treatment is stopped before all of the visits are used, any discount will be cancelled and visits used will be billed at their "full" price, and/or an "administrative fee" will be charged for early cancellation.

Moreover, in April 2008, the Maryland Board of Chiropractic and Massage Therapy Examiners advised chiropractors not to use extended treatment contracts. In February, 2009, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts settled charges against a chiropractor through a consent order under which he must pay investigative costs plus a $5,000 fine; serve probation for two years; and provide full refunds to several patients who did not receive all of the treatments for which they contracted.

 

If you entered into an extended treatment contract with your chiropractor, please contact us to discuss your legal options.