In light of court decision, employers are encouraged to review their health plan overpayment recovery provisions.

A recent United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit decision against UnitedHealth Group (“United”) regarding a health plan overpayment recovery practice known as “cross-plan offsetting” has generated concerns for employers with self-insured group health plans. 

The practice involves a claims administrator recouping an overpayment made by one plan (Plan A) to a provider by withholding payment due to that provider from another plan (Plan B) and paying that amount to Plan A.  This practice is more controversial in the out-of-network provider context, because the provider would be able to bill the participant in Plan B for the amount Plan B paid to Plan A.  (If the provider were in-network, the provider would generally be prohibited by its in-network agreement from billing the patient.)

The United case involved two out-of-network healthcare providers who started separate class action lawsuits against United in 2014 and 2015 on behalf of some of their patients whose claim payments from self-insured health plans had been subject to United’s cross-plan offsetting practice.  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (as well as the District Court below it) expressed serious concerns as to whether cross-plan offsetting could ever be permissible under ERISA.  The Court, however, did not rule on that issue, because it held that the plan documentation did not authorize cross-plan offsetting.  Notably, the Department of Labor took an interest in the United Case, as it authored an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief, arguing that the practice of cross-plan offsetting in the out-of-network provider context violated ERISA.

Employers with self-insured plans should determine whether their claims administrator engages in cross-plan off-setting, and if so, analyze whether the practice is permissible under ERISA.  The analysis is complicated and there may not be a clear answer.  At a minimum, if an employer wants to continue to engage in cross-plan offsetting, it should ensure that its plan documentation specifically authorizes it.

Please click here to read our latest LEGALcurrents® alert for more detailed information about the court decision and additional recommendations.

2019 Annual Inflation Adjustments
The (Po)Seiden Adventure


This website presents only general information not intended as legal advice. Although we encourage calls, letters and emails from prospective clients, please keep in mind that merely contacting Harter Secrest & Emery LLP (HSE) does not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Confidential information should not be sent to HSE until you have been notified in writing by HSE that a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Information sent to us before then may not be treated as confidential by HSE or the court.

I have read this and agree     Cancel

Our website uses cookies. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.