Michigan plaintiff Edward C. is suing Unum Life Insurance Company of America for wrongfully denying his disability benefits. Under the terms and agreements of Unum’s disability insurance, Edward met the conditions and requirements to receive benefits, according to his Unum lawsuit.

Previously, Edward was actively employed in a full-time position and was supposed to be provided disability insurance through his employer. However, Edward had been contending with severe back pain for some time, which eventually caused him to resign from his position.

His back pain had been so severe that it prevented him from performing his occupation duties, and had rendered him unable to work in his occupation, the Unum lawsuit claims. Since then, he has been unable to find a job that pays a comparable salary, has lost a significant percentage of his earnings, and continues to incur medical bills. His physician insists that he cannot work due to his condition, and is liable for disability benefits.

In addition to the medical testimony provided in his Unum lawsuit, Edward’s lawyers insist that he qualifies for Unum’s long-term disability benefits because he could not continue working due to an injury. Unum’s policy clearly states that if a policyholder becomes ill or injured that they are entitled to the benefits that would be vital to Edward’s situation. All medical evidence suggests that Edward met this requirement, and would give Unum no reason to deny him his disability benefits, the Unum lawsuit claims.

Despite this, the lawsuit alleges Unum did not see this as the case when coming to the decision to deny him his disability benefits. Despite following all administrative procedures, meeting all deadlines, and submitting all valid paperwork and medical testimony, Unum allegedly still denied Edward disability benefits. Edward claims he appealed in a timely manner but was met with the same result; in neither time did Unum present a valid explanation for why Edward was denied, he claims.

The Unum claim denial lawsuit states that Unum deliberately ignored important medical testimony and did not have valid reason to deny Edward his disability benefits. All evidence Edward submitted proves permanent disability, the lawsuit claims, calling Unum into question of possibly practicing bad faith insurance and for deliberately breaching contract.

So for allegedly using illegal claim denial tactics and practicing bad faith insurance, Edward is suing Unum Life Insurance Company. Edward is seeking the amount in all missed payments, plus any additional interest.

This Unum claim denial lawsuit is Edward C. v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, Case No. 2:14-cv-14284-AJT-MKM, in the U.S. District of Eastern Michigan, Southern Division.

Overview of Unum Claim Denial Tactics

Unum is the largest and oldest disability insurance company in the country, and has garnered a long history of denying claims using a variety of excuses. Jilted policyholders complain of being denied disability benefits despite following all procedural instructions and submitting any valid medical evidence they had.

According to legal experts, nearly 40% of disability insurance policies in the United States are handled by Unum, accounting for as many as 17 million people. This is an alarming statistic, considering that policyholders are relying on this company to come through for them in the event that they actually need to use their disability insurance.

For years, Unum has been accused of using illegal claim denial tactics to systematically deny disability claims in order to retain a certain level of profit for the company. Unum’s systematic claim denial process led to the filing of 3,000 lawsuits filed by the federal government, state regulators, and private Unum attorneys representing rejected Unum policyholders.

Unum claim denial tactics mentioned in these Unum lawsuits include, but are not limited to:

• Changing policies after claims are filed (and without the authorization or knowledge of policy holders)
• Improperly investigating the claim and obtaining opinions from unqualified parties
• Misreading medical records, often by their independent medical examiners
• Demanding repeated requests for independent medical examinations or denying a claim without any medical examination
• Refusing to acknowledge policyholder’s disability
• Arguing that the claim is a pre-existing condition
• Denying a claim with the intent to wear the claimant down to a lower settlement
• Partially paying a claim for total disability
• Use of detectives, friends, co-workers and neighbors in an attempt to discredit the disability