That would be a fairly cruddy day discovering you can’t continue your cancer treatment because your health insurance canceled on you. I’m not sure the punitives needed to be that high though. Wish I knew more about the company.
I am so happy the insurance company lost. Now she needs to go after the doctor who refused to continue treating her after the insurance company refused to pay.
What happen the doctors oath that they take before the are licensed?
I am not sure the whole truth was being told here. If I am not mistaken, didn’t she lie on her application and took it out just before she had breast cancer (knowing she needed it)?
If she has the policy for years, then I would agree 100% with the judgement. But I think their may have been aplication fraud on this one. If so, the fraud of getting insurance just before you need it as well as the 9mm judgement results in Americans paying more for their healthcare.
Swambo…..in response to your suggestion that she goes after the doctor as well, it would not be him/her who determines whether s/he should continue treating the individual or not; it’s the hospital. If the doctor can not treat her at the medical facility where s/he practices, then there is nothing that s/he can do. In addition, unlike doctors who have a moral obligation to help those individuals under the Hypocratic Oath that they take, hospitals are in the business of making money – just like any other business.
I cannot believe they had incentives for their people to cancel policyholders coverages. If I was on the jury, I would have made them pay double this amount.
Rosie,
You would only make them pay double??? Are you evil or something, she should have gotten at least 100 million for all that!
The good part about a higher settlement is that me, you and everyone else can pay for it. This allows health care cost to rise even more, which is what we all want, right? Ooops, I forgot the left way of doing things, have judges grant these kind of judgements all day long and then expect healthcare cost to come down! I learned that from liberal economics 101! What I love about liberals is that they make all the sense in the world!
This verdict is justified due to the bonus plan for cancellations for patients with “costly” treatment. The bonus was two-fold with compensation based upon (1) the # of policy cancellations w/active treatment and (2) $$$ results. One of their former executives interviewed with my company and tried to “sell” that idea. Neither was employed by my company…
If there is no gap in coverage the pre-existing condition is covered. The agent advised her she could switch coverage to HealthNet and save money. The analyst that cancelled her poliicy received a bonus based upon “$6M is savings” from policies she canceled as a Senior Analyst. A few of you have call this a “win for women” however it was a woman that decided to cancel this policy with the knowledge the customer was suffering from breast cancer.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
That would be a fairly cruddy day discovering you can’t continue your cancer treatment because your health insurance canceled on you. I’m not sure the punitives needed to be that high though. Wish I knew more about the company.
I am so happy the insurance company lost. Now she needs to go after the doctor who refused to continue treating her after the insurance company refused to pay.
What happen the doctors oath that they take before the are licensed?
What Me Worry. Gues who my new carrier is effective 3/1/08.
Health Net in New York
I am not sure the whole truth was being told here. If I am not mistaken, didn’t she lie on her application and took it out just before she had breast cancer (knowing she needed it)?
If she has the policy for years, then I would agree 100% with the judgement. But I think their may have been aplication fraud on this one. If so, the fraud of getting insurance just before you need it as well as the 9mm judgement results in Americans paying more for their healthcare.
Swambo…..in response to your suggestion that she goes after the doctor as well, it would not be him/her who determines whether s/he should continue treating the individual or not; it’s the hospital. If the doctor can not treat her at the medical facility where s/he practices, then there is nothing that s/he can do. In addition, unlike doctors who have a moral obligation to help those individuals under the Hypocratic Oath that they take, hospitals are in the business of making money – just like any other business.
I cannot believe they had incentives for their people to cancel policyholders coverages. If I was on the jury, I would have made them pay double this amount.
Rosie,
You would only make them pay double??? Are you evil or something, she should have gotten at least 100 million for all that!
The good part about a higher settlement is that me, you and everyone else can pay for it. This allows health care cost to rise even more, which is what we all want, right? Ooops, I forgot the left way of doing things, have judges grant these kind of judgements all day long and then expect healthcare cost to come down! I learned that from liberal economics 101! What I love about liberals is that they make all the sense in the world!
This verdict is justified due to the bonus plan for cancellations for patients with “costly” treatment. The bonus was two-fold with compensation based upon (1) the # of policy cancellations w/active treatment and (2) $$$ results. One of their former executives interviewed with my company and tried to “sell” that idea. Neither was employed by my company…
Another article I read on this said that she failed to disclose pre-existng cancer.
If there is no gap in coverage the pre-existing condition is covered. The agent advised her she could switch coverage to HealthNet and save money. The analyst that cancelled her poliicy received a bonus based upon “$6M is savings” from policies she canceled as a Senior Analyst. A few of you have call this a “win for women” however it was a woman that decided to cancel this policy with the knowledge the customer was suffering from breast cancer.