While plaintiff Sandra Peters did not lose money in the alleged affair due to coinsurance limits, the appellate court found that it is possible Aetna conducted a “breach of its fiduciary duty” in burying administrative fees, and Optum utilized unauthorized transactions, according to court documents.
Appellate judges sided with Ms. Peters, therein restoring the right to sue the companies after the hidden charges allegedly more than doubled her coinsurance payments, as well as fees collected from her insurance plan, according to court documents.
In the reverse ruling, judges sided with Ms. Peters’ initial claim that the alleged offense is a violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Ms. Peters aims to represent two parties: herself and her company’s, Mars, self-funded insurance plan.
The initial lawsuit was first made by Ms.Peters in 2015.
Aetna and Optum have not replied to requests for comment.
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.