Virginia plaintiff Mary A. is suing Unum Life Insurance Company for allegedly denying her long-term disability benefits, despite overwhelming physical evidence supporting her insurance claim. Mary alleges that Unum made its decision to deny her claim by using bad faith insurance practices.

According to Mary’s Unum bad faith insurance lawsuit, not only had Unum denied her claim under false claims, but had also published numerous false statements about her during the claim filing process. Mary’s lawyers state that Unum’s actions are troubling and are directly contradict the defendant’s best interest, since Unum had initially approved Mary’s claim. However, by allegedly committing bad faith insurance, the defendant may have protected their credibility as an insurance company.

Overview of Unum Claim Denial Lawsuit

Mary’s battle with Unum started in March 2010, when she suffered a terrible car crash and sustained devastating injuries. Instead of accepting the overwhelming medical evidence and testimony submitted by the plaintiff’s physician, Unum still denied her disability insurance claim and allegedly even made efforts to discredit her insurance claim for long-term disability benefits. According to Mary’s medical records, she suffered multiple injuries to her legs and back that her left her partially paralyzed and unable to do her job. It is important to note that her spine had begun degenerating some time before the crash, which further compounded the devastation of the collision.

Mary filed for long-term disability benefits to Unum soon after the crash and had initially been approved. Mary claims submitted all required documentation and medical evidence during the disability benefit claim submission process, to which Unum agreed that she was in need of long-term care. Mary had been previously fully employed as a pharmacy technician for CVS, a job that typically include duties like assisting customers, processing prescriptions, register transactions, inputting data into a computer, and other duties that require heavy concentration, extended periods of standing, and intense typing.

Ever since her accident, the plaintiff has only been able to work part time as a technician since June of 2012, and has been unable to earn sufficient income. Throughout her recovery, Mary had undergone several surgeries and now undergoes intense physical therapy and steroid treatment installments. Despite the progress, Mary’s physicians state that it will be impossible for her to return to full employment and can not perform the same duties as she had previously. It is important to note that even though Unum had initially approved Mary for long-term disability benefits, they had contacted her healthcare providers multiple times to verify the claims made on her application, and had finally accepted after her physician insisted that even basic mobility is now very limited for her.

Unum Bad Faith Insurance Allegations

According to the defense in this bad faith insurance lawsuit, Unum had approved Mary for long-term benefits up until Oct. 8, 2012, because it had been initially believed she could return to work full-time one this date. However, this changed when the pain had not dissipated and Unum responded by stating she was only eligible for partial long-term disability benefits. It was at this point that Unum conducted an extensive review of Mary’s claim, interviewing her physicians and employer as well as having their independent medical reviewers examine Mary’s claim and medical evidence. Using third party medical reviewers is a common claim denial tactic Unum has been accused of using under bad faith insurance practices.

In doing so, Mary’s lawyers state that Unum had contradicted its initial decision in finding their client’s long-term disability claim credible. In Unum’s decision to revoke Mary’s long-term benefits, the company insinuated that Mary’s physicians had exaggerated her condition to increase the likelihood of Mary’s chances of disability benefits claim approval. Additionally, Unum had also suggested that several medical tests had been falsified or were outdated when the test had only been performed three months prior. Unum’s medical reviewers state that Mary’s claim was invalid because there was no evidence of neurological damage, despite overwhelming physical evidence, as well as the plaintiff’s overall phsyical condition.

Unum ended Mary’s long-term disability benefits in 2012 and she has allegedly been barely surviving since 2014. Mary is taking legal action against Unum for allegedly practicing bad faith insurance and for wrongfully denying her claim. Mary is seeking all civil and punitive damages, and compensation for all missed payments.

This Unum Claim Denial Lawsuit is Case No. 3:15-cv-00219-JAG, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.