LIENS
Welcome to Synergy’s blog page dedicated to the topic of lien resolution. Our team of subrogation experts share their InSights and knowledge on the latest developments and best practices in lien resolution. Stay up-to-date with the latest trends and strategies to ensure that you have the information you need to navigate the complexities of lien resolution.
In our previous blog, we tackled the Medicare conditional payment resolution process. However, if your client, during treatment for their injuries, switched to a Medicare Advantage Plan (MAO-Part C), the resolution process might not be over. Here’s why: While you may have resolved conditional payments with Medicare Parts A and B (traditional Medicare), MAO plans operate independently and may have covered some or all of your client’s medical expenses.
The issue arises because MAO plans are distinct from traditional Medicare, and beneficiaries can enroll in them during specific periods. Consequently, even if you resolved Medicare conditional payments, an MAO might have stepped in later, without your knowledge. CMS will not notify you about these MAO payments, and beneficiaries often lack clarity on their coverage types so it can easily be missed.
To verify MAO plan coverage, clients can check their status on MyMedicare.gov. Additionally, the 2020 PAID Act requires CMS to report MAO enrollments for the past three years, though access to this data is limited to Non-Group Health Plan Responsible Reporting Entities (RREs). You might need to request this information from the defense or painstakingly review medical bills to uncover potential MAO liens.
Attorneys must be vigilant, conducting thorough due diligence to uncover possible MAO liens. Failure to address these could result in double damages, as MAOs do enforce their reimbursement rights aggressively. The Medicare Secondary Payer Act grants MAOs the right to sue for double the lien amount if not repaid, a risk highlighted by cases like Humana v. Western Heritage Ins. Co. Here, Humana successfully claimed double damages after Western Heritage failed to reimburse a $191,000 lien.
To prevent such pitfalls, start your investigation early upon client intake, continue throughout representation, and finalize it before disbursing settlement funds. Identify any MAO liens and seek reduction or compromise as appropriate. Understanding and managing MAO liens is crucial to safeguarding your firm against significant financial exposure for this hidden lien.
Working with specialized lien resolution companies can provide essential expertise and prevent costly mistakes when it comes to Medicare Advantage plan liens. If you want to find out more, contact us today to Partner with Synergy for lien resolution.
Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., MSCC | CEO
In personal injury law, attorneys focus on proving causation, liability, and damages. Given the complexities that arise during settlement, outsourcing certain tasks has become a common practice to enhance efficiency and client outcomes. Just as attorneys engage experts in probate, guardianship, tax matters or even medical record retrieval, lien resolution can similarly benefit from specialized assistance. This approach not only addresses the complications of lien resolution but also when done correctly complies with ethical requirements and improves client outcomes.
Why Outsource Lien Resolution?
Personal injury attorneys often face multifaceted lien issues that are governed by intricate laws and regulations, such as ERISA, the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, and various state-specific laws. For instance, a client may have multiple Medicare components—Traditional Medicare (Parts A/B) and Medicare Advantage (Part C)—each with distinct obligations and requirements. Navigating these can be overwhelming, especially when dealing with several different lien types in one case.
Ethical Considerations
Outsourcing lien resolution is both practical and ethical, provided it is managed correctly. ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 08-451 outlines that while lawyers can outsource legal and non-legal support services, they must retain ultimate responsibility for the work and maintain direct supervisory authority. This means that while lien resolution experts can handle the details, the attorney oversees their work and ensures compliance with all professional obligations.
State-Specific Guidelines
Different states have addressed the outsourcing of lien resolution. For example, New York permits lawyers to hire external lien resolution firms as long as the costs are reasonable, disclosed to the client, and result in a net benefit. Similarly, Ohio and Utah have established that outsourcing is permissible under certain conditions, including obtaining client consent and ensuring the fees are reasonable and transparent.
Key Takeaways
- Efficiency and Expertise: Outsourcing lien resolution can streamline the process, reduce operational costs, and leverage the expertise of specialists to enhance client outcomes.
- Ethical Compliance: Ensure that the outsourcing process adheres to ABA Model Rules and state-specific guidelines, including maintaining client confidentiality, securing informed consent, and ensuring costs are reasonable.
- Client Benefit: The primary goal of outsourcing should be to protect and maximize the client’s recovery. This approach helps ensure that lien resolution is handled expertly, safeguarding against potential legal and financial risks.
In conclusion, outsourcing lien resolution is a strategic decision that, when done ethically, helps a law firm run more efficiently and benefits clients by securing better outcomes. If you want to do a deep dive into ethical outsourcing of lien resolution, click HERE to download our white paper called “How to Outsource Lien Resolution Ethically”. If you are ready to outsource today and partner with Synergy, contact us TODAY.
Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., MSCC | CEO
Correctly navigating Medicare’s conditional payment resolution process is critical for personal injury attorneys, given the complex legal framework and the substantial risks involved in failure to reimburse. Under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSPA), the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have broad powers to recover payments made on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries, including the right to sue trial attorneys directly. Failing to address Medicare’s reimbursement claims correctly can lead to severe financial and legal consequences for personal injury law firms.
MSPA: The Legal Framework
CMS can recover conditional payments from any entity that touches settlement dollars which are meant to reimburse medical expenses, including attorneys who handle personal injury settlements. The case of U.S. v. Harris starkly illustrates the potential pitfalls. In this case, a personal injury attorney was held liable for Medicare’s conditional payments despite settling a claim and notifying Medicare. The court ruled against the attorney, emphasizing that CMS’s rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(2) extend to recovering from entities that have received payments from primary plans, a personal injury law attorney.
A Labyrinth: The Medicare Resolution Process
Resolving Medicare’s conditional payments involves several steps:
- Initial Reporting: Contact the Benefits Coordination & Recovery Contractor (BCRC) before settlement to obtain a Conditional Payment Letter (CPL). This letter is preliminary and should be audited to remove unrelated care.
- Final Demand: After settlement, Medicare must be informed, and a Final Demand will then be issued. Payment must be made within 60 days to avoid interest accumulation and potential enforcement actions by the DOJ.
Mistakes to Avoid: Common Pitfalls
There are some common mistakes made by personal injury law firms when it comes to conditional payments. These mistakes can be costly, and it is best to avoid them:
- Relying on Conditional Payment Letters: Conditional Payment Letters are not final. Only a Final Demand Letter from Medicare confirms the amount due and is binding. Relying on preliminary figures can lead to significant shortfalls and legal issues, as evidenced by a 2019 case where a Maryland law firm settled a claim which was based upon reliance on incorrect figures in a Conditional Payment Letter.
- Improper Resolution Channels: Using incorrect methods to resolve conditional payments, such as state court proceedings instead of the required administrative processes, can result in severe repercussions, as seen in a Texas case where a state court ruling was sought to reduce what was owed to Medicare which wasn’t effective. Instead, the trial attorney was sued by the government for failure to properly reimburse Medicare.
Reducing What is Owed: Appeals, Compromises, and Waivers
When dealing with Medicare’s repayment formula, attorneys face a rigid calculation per the applicable regulation. The calculated repayment amount often doesn’t account for case-specific details impacting the recovery such as liability issues or policy limits. To address this fact, attorneys can:
- Appeal: Navigate through Medicare’s multi-level internal appeal process, which is lengthy, and interest accrues during the appeal. Or.
- Request Compromise/Waiver: After paying the Final Demand, attorneys can request a compromise or waiver, potentially leading to a refund. Requests can be made under:
- Section 1870(c): Financial hardship waiver.
- Section 1862(b): Best interest of the program waiver.
- Federal Claims Collection Act: General compromise request.
Conclusion
Effective resolution of Medicare conditional payments requires diligence and adherence to proper processes prescribed by Medicare. Attorneys should avoid relying on preliminary figures, ensure timely and accurate reporting, and use appropriate channels for appeals or compromise/waiver requests. Understanding and navigating Medicare’s complex requirements is crucial to safeguarding against personal liability and ensuring successful settlement outcomes.
Working with specialized lien resolution companies can provide essential expertise and prevent costly mistakes when it comes to Medicare conditional payments. If you want to find out more, contact us today to Partner with Synergy for lien resolution.
Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., MSCC | CEO
As a trial lawyer, you might wonder why you should consider outsourcing lien resolution when it seems manageable to handle in-house. Additionally, you may question whether it’s ethically permissible to engage a lien resolution company like Synergy. The answers to these questions highlight both practical and ethical considerations essential for personal injury law firms to operate at peak efficiency.
Why Outsource Lien Resolution?
Efficiency and Expertise: Handling liens is a complex, time-consuming task that often diverts focus from core legal work for personal injury law firms. When law firms resolve liens in-house, they must investigate, identify, audit, verify and resolve various liens, including subrogation claims and debts against settlements. This involves assessing the legal validity of claims and engaging in protracted negotiations. Given these responsibilities, it is easy to see why outsourcing can enhance efficiency. Specialized lien resolution firms bring deep expertise and dedicated resources, offering a streamlined process that can significantly reduce the burden on a personal injury firm.
Navigating Complexities: The landscape of lien resolution involves dealing with various types of liens, including Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA, and more. Each has its own set of rules, regulations and resolution processes. Government benefit plans and recovery vendors are often large, well-funded entities with the sole focus of recovering money from personal injury settlements. These organizations have extensive resources and sophisticated strategies to assert their claims. Partnering with a lien resolution expert allows you to leverage their specialized knowledge and negotiation skills, leveling the playing field when confronting recovery contractors.
Cost-Effectiveness: Outsourcing lien resolution can also be financially advantageous. The costs associated with managing liens internally—such as time, resources, and potential delays—can add up quickly. By outsourcing, a personal injury law firm can reduce operating expenses and avoid the inefficiencies associated with handling these tasks in-house. This approach allows you to focus on moving cases toward settlement or trial, ultimately improving your firm’s bottom line.
Ethical Considerations When Outsourcing
Compliance and Integrity: It is important to ensure that outsourcing lien resolution complies with ethical and legal obligations. Law firms must adhere to specific rules governing the management of client funds and lien resolution. This includes maintaining transparency and ensuring that the outsourced firm operates within the legal and ethical frameworks set by the applicable Bar regulatory bodies. A future blog post will address how to comply with ethical rules when outsourcing lien resolution, ensuring that client interests are protected and professional integrity is maintained.
Conclusion
Outsourcing lien resolution is more than a logistical decision; it is a strategic move that can greatly benefit personal injury law firms. It provides access to specialized expertise, enhances efficiency, and reduces operational costs. While navigating lien laws can be challenging, partnering with a dedicated lien resolution team ensures that you can achieve optimal results for your clients and maintain a competitive edge in your practice.
If you want to learn more about outsourcing, click HERE to download our “Strategic Benefits of Outsourcing Lien Resolution for Personal Injury Law Firms” white paper. If you would like to get started with outsourcing lien resolution and partner with Synergy, contact us today!
Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., MSCC | CEO
In the complicated world of personal injury practice, lien resolution is a pivotal yet often daunting aspect of the resolution process for cases. For trial lawyers, the task of the resolution of various liens can be both challenging and crucial to maximizing the client’s net recovery. The evolving complexity of healthcare reimbursement systems and the rigorous regulatory requirements of government plans necessitate a meticulous approach to lien resolution.
Understanding Lien Resolution
Lien resolution requires a detailed process for addressing and negotiating claims made by healthcare providers, government agencies, and other entities against a portion of a settlement in a personal injury case. These claims, or liens, must be resolved to ensure that settlement funds are distributed to the injured party free of any future claims by healthcare providers or insurance plans. Failure to resolve liens correctly can lead to significant financial and legal consequences for everyone involved.
The Importance of Lien Resolution
- Client Recovery: The accurate and efficient resolution of liens is essential for maximizing the amount of settlement funds available to the client. A less-than-optimal lien resolution process can drastically reduce the client’s net recovery, creating more financial strain post-settlement and less satisfaction with the outcome.
- Compliance: Adhering to legal and ethical requirements is crucial. Different types of liens—such as those from Medicare, Medicaid, ERISA, FEHBA, Military, hospital, and private health insurance—come with specific resolution processes and legal issues. Understanding and complying with these processes/laws is vital to avoid complications.
- Financial Responsibility: Appropriate resolution helps prevent financial liabilities for all involved parties. Incorrect handling can result in claims against settlement funds even after they’ve been disbursed, potentially leading to additional financial burdens.
- Professional Reputation: Efficiently resolving liens not only satisfies clients but also enhances an attorney’s reputation. Positive outcomes and satisfied clients often translate into more referrals and better professional reviews online.
Lien resolution is more than just a procedural necessity; it is a critical element in ensuring that clients receive the maximum net recovery from their settlements. For trial lawyers, mastering this aspect of resolution is essential for achieving optimal outcomes and maintaining a high standard of professional excellence. In many situations, it may be best to outsource this function to reduce liability, eliminate internal costs of resolution, and get the best net recovery for the client.
If you want to learn much, much more about lien resolution and outsourcing, click here to download our Outsourcing & Lien Resolution Guide for Trial Lawyers. To learn more about partnering with Synergy for lien resolution click HERE.
Written by: Jason D. Lazarus, J.D., LL.M., CSSC, MSCC | CEO
Settling a personal injury case can be a moment of relief for both the plaintiff and their attorney. However, a significant hurdle often remains: resolving health insurance liens. These liens can significantly impact the final recovery amount for your client, making it crucial to address them effectively. This article focuses on ERISA plans and their policy documents related to liens.
Understanding Health Insurance Liens
When a plaintiff receives medical treatment for injuries related to a personal injury claim, their health insurance provider often pays the medical bills. In return, the insurer may have a lien interest in the amount of the medical expenses covered, providing a right to reimbursement from any settlement or judgment. This reimbursement claim, known as a health insurance lien, is based on the contractual and statutory rights of the insurer.
Steps to Resolving Health Insurance Liens
- Identify and Notify All Potential Lienholders: Early in the case, identify all entities that may assert a lien. This includes health insurance companies, Medicare, Medicaid, and any other potential third-party payers. Notify these entities, in writing, of the pending litigation and request detailed lien information.
- Review Plan Documents and Lien Claims: Carefully examine the insurance policy or plan documents to understand the basis and amount of the lien. Check for any errors or inaccuracies, and for relatedness in the lien claim. It’s also essential to scrutinize whether the lien is enforceable under federal or state law.
- Negotiate the Lien Amount: Engage in negotiations with the lienholder. Highlight any equitable considerations, such as the extent of the damages, the plaintiff’s overall recovery, and the attorney’s fees and costs. Insurers should compromise on the lien amount when a persuasive argument is presented.
- Utilize the Common Fund Doctrine: This doctrine can often reduce the lien amount by requiring the lienholder to share in the attorney’s fees and costs. The rationale is that the lienholder benefits from the attorney’s efforts to recover the settlement.
- Document Everything: Keep meticulous records of all communications, negotiations, and agreements related to the lien. This documentation can be crucial if disputes arise later.
ERISA Liens
Plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) often have strong reimbursement rights. These plans, provided by private employers, can preempt state laws, making them particularly powerful. It is their policy language that controls the strength of their reimbursement right. The key issues include:
- Federal vs. State Law: Self-funded ERISA plans can assert strong reimbursement rights that preempt state anti-subrogation laws, limiting the avenues for reduction or negotiation of the lien. Fully insured ERISA plans can also assert strong reimbursement rights even if those plans are indeed subject to state law. Some states allow a fully insured ERISA plan to override state law that would limit their reimbursement. Because of this, regardless of the funding status, obtaining all plan documents is crucial.
- Plan Terms Interpretation: Courts often require strict adherence to the terms of the ERISA plan documents. The McCutchen case made this abundantly clear for self-funded ERISA plans. Understanding and interpreting these terms correctly is essential.
Right to Obtain the Plan Documents
Under ERISA, plan participants have specific rights to obtain plan documents from their plan administrators. These rights are crucial for participants to understand their benefits, how the plan operates, and their entitlements. Section 104(b)(4) of ERISA, codified as 29 U.S.C. § 1024(b)(4), outlines these rights.
The Plan Documents should be obtained directly from the Plan Administrator and not the insurance carrier or the subrogation vendor.
- Written Request:
- Plan participants or beneficiaries can request copies of certain plan documents in writing from the plan administrator.
- Types of Documents:
- Summary Plan Description (SPD): Provides a comprehensive overview of the plan, including benefits, rights, and obligations of participants.
- Summary of Material Modifications (SMM): Describes changes to the plan or the SPD.
- Annual Report (Form 5500): Contains financial information, plan operations, and compliance information.
- Plan Document: The formal written document that establishes the plan and its terms.
- Trust Agreement: If applicable, the document that sets up the trust to hold plan assets.
- Collective Bargaining Agreement: If the plan is subject to one, this document outlines the agreement between the employer and the union.
- Insurance Contract: For plans funded through insurance, the contract between the plan and the insurer.
- Response Time
- Plan administrators are required to provide the requested documents within 30 days of receiving the written request.
- Civil Penalties:
- If the plan administrator fails to comply with a request for documents within 30 days, they may be liable for a penalty of up to $110 per day (adjusted periodically for inflation) from the date of the failure to provide the documents.
Contract Law Principles and Strategies
- Examine the Plan Language
- Ambiguities in the Plan Document: Carefully review the ERISA plan documents to identify any ambiguities in the reimbursement or subrogation clauses. Under the doctrine of contra proferentem, ambiguities in the contract are construed against the drafter. If the language is unclear, you may argue that it should be interpreted in favor of your client.
- Scope and Limits of Reimbursement: Ensure the plan’s reimbursement claim strictly adheres to the terms outlined in the plan document. Some plans may have specific provisions or limitations regarding the scope of their recovery rights.
- Make Whole Doctrine
- Plan Language Examination: Assess whether the plan explicitly disclaims the “make whole” doctrine. If it does not, you can argue that the plan should only be reimbursed if and when your client has been fully compensated (made whole) for all their losses, including pain and suffering, lost wages, and future medical expenses.
- Equitable Arguments: Use the make whole doctrine to negotiate a reduction in the lien amount, arguing that the plaintiff has not been fully compensated for their total losses.
- Common Fund Doctrine
- Attorney’s Fees and Costs: The common fund doctrine may require the ERISA plan to share in the attorney’s fees and costs incurred in obtaining the settlement. Argue that the plan’s recovery should be reduced proportionally to account for the legal expenses incurred in creating the settlement fund.
- Explicit Plan Language: Verify if the plan explicitly addresses the common fund doctrine. If the plan does not waive this doctrine, you can argue that it applies.
- Analyze the Plan’s Equitable Lien by Agreement
- Equitable Lien Requirements: For an equitable lien by agreement to be enforceable, the plan must identify a specific fund (the settlement) and assert a right to a portion of that fund. Ensure the lien is tied to the settlement and not your client’s general assets.
- Constructive Trust: ERISA plans often seek a constructive trust on settlement funds. Argue that the plan’s right to recovery should be limited to specific funds clearly identified in the settlement agreement.
- Proportional Allocation of Damages
- Detailed Settlement Allocation: Structure the settlement to allocate specific amounts to various categories of damages, such as medical expenses, pain and suffering, and lost wages. Argue that the ERISA lien should only apply to the portion allocated to medical expenses.
- Court Approval: Seek court approval of the settlement allocation to strengthen the argument against the ERISA lien’s applicability to non-medical portions of the settlement.
- Equitable Relief
- Equitable Defenses: Use equitable defenses such as unjust enrichment, undue hardship, or the unclean hands doctrine to argue that full reimbursement would be inequitable under the circumstances, if applicable.
- Negotiation and Settlement
- Negotiation Tactics: Engage in negotiations with the ERISA plan administrator, insurance carrier, subrogation vendor, etc., presenting all legal and equitable arguments to seek a reduction in the lien amount.
Conclusion
Combating an ERISA lien on a personal injury settlement requires a thorough understanding of both the specific plan language and applicable contract law principles. By carefully analyzing the plan documents, leveraging doctrines like make whole and common fund, and employing strategic negotiation tactics, personal injury attorneys can often reduce the impact of these liens on their clients’ recoveries. Effective use of these strategies not only maximizes the client’s net recovery but also ensures compliance with legal and ethical standards.
While a personal injury attorney may be able to resolve a lien on their own, it is more efficient and advantageous to engage Synergy for this specialized task. This allows attorneys to focus on other revenue generating cases, knowing that a team of lien experts are diligently working to achieve the best possible result for their client. Synergy’s expertise and hundreds of years of combined experience in handling ERISA liens ensure that the settlement process are preserved as much as possible, leading to optimal outcomes for the client.
Synergy is your lien resolution partner for all health insurance liens – ERISA, FEHBA, Military, Medicaid, Med Pay, Medicare, Hospital, Private and more. Partner with Synergy today to see what a difference it makes for the efficiency and profitability of your firm.
Written by: Teresa Kenyon | Vice President of Lien Resolution Services
BLOGS
READY TO SCHEDULE A CONSULTATION?
The Synergy team will work diligently to ensure your case gets the attention it deserves. Contact one of our legal experts and get a professional review of your case today.