Skip to main content

Axa Equitable Will Pay Consumers Up To $850,000 Due To Unlawful Changes In Insurance Policies

NEW YORK- Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman announced today a settlement with AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company, after an investigation revealed that the corporation made an undisclosed change to its medical claim reimbursement policy resulting in lower reimbursements for many members. As a result of the investigation, AXA Equitable has already changed its medical claim reimbursement policy to honor the terms of its members' health insurance plans. The settlement, which could reach $850,000, requires AXA Equitable to pay restitution to members, in New York as well as outside the state, who were adversely impacted by the insurance company’s actions.

"These consumers paid their bills and played by the rules, only to discover their insurance policies had changed with no warning by AXA Equitable. At the very least – consumers should expect that the terms of their health plans are honored," said Attorney General Schneiderman. "It is unacceptable for AXA Equitable to switch its claim reimbursement policy to one that pays less, without alerting plan members."

The Attorney General's Health Care Bureau found that beginning in September 2011, and continuing through May 2012, despite the policy's terms of reimbursement at the usual and customary rate, AXA Equitable used data from a third-party to reimburse medical claims affecting several hundred consumers. The switch resulted in lower medical claim reimbursements for many members than had been the case previously.

AXA Equitable has agreed to reimburse consumers in an amount that could reach almost $850,000. Within 60 days of the signed agreement, AXA Equitable will mail members information on how they can submit a claim for restitution. AXA Equitable also agreed to:

Employ FAIR Health, Inc.(www.fairhealth.org) as the data source for its medical claims reimbursement policy. FAIR Health, Inc. was established in October 2009 as part of the settlement of an investigation by the New York State Attorney General, into the health insurance industry’s methods for determining out-of-network reimbursement.

Prepare and file a report with the Office of the Attorney General that contains pertinent information regarding the member restitution process including the number of notices sent to members, the number of member claims that were reprocessedunder the settlement, and the total dollar amount of the restitution checks issued to members for claims processed under the settlement.

Pay $30,000 in costs to cover the Attorney General's investigation.

"I thank Attorney General Schneiderman for ensuring that through his office's agreement and DFS's stipulation with AXA, consumers will receive the health care reimbursements they expected from their insurer,” said Benjamin M. Lawsky, Superintendent of Financial Services. “AXA has acted responsibly by agreeing to reimburse its policyholders and to use data from Fair Health going forward, ensuring that consumers' claims will be paid in a consistent and fair manner.”

Consumers with questions or concerns about health care matters may call the Attorney General's Health Care Bureau Helpline at 1-800-428-9071.

This investigation was handled by Assistant Attorney General Brant Campbell under the supervision of Health Care Bureau Chief Lisa Landau and Executive Deputy Attorney General for Social Justice Janet Sabel.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...