It was also known as, and originally named, the Consumer Value Store and was founded in Lowell, Massachusetts, in 1963.. February 16, 2023 Clark County contractor must repay state for stealing $127K in workers' comp scam. Notably, each of the claim forms completed and signed by LeAnn on May 6, 2003 included the following: WARNING: Any person who knowingly presents a false or fraudulent claim for payment of a loss or benefit or knowingly presents false information in an application for insurance is guilty of a crime and may be subject to fines and confinement in prison. Conseco Claim Form, No. They laughed and I hung up. Martin died on June 24, 2013, and his Estate was substituted as a plaintiff. Adamski v. Allstate Ins. The statute of limitations for such injuries begins to run, in the first instance, when the insurer communicates to the insured the results of its inadequate investigation, and in the latter instance, when the insurer communicates to the insured its refusal to consider the new evidence that discredits the insurer's basis for its claim denial. 15. The Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of Washington, the . 10/22/22 - still no emails. See id. Rancosky notes that that Conseco's Manual was admitted into evidence, without objection, at the breach of contract trial. Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. LeAnn indicated that she had been told that her premiums would be waived if she was diagnosed with cancer and totally disabled, and requested that the Cancer Policy be reinstated. 0. See Romano v. Nationwide Mut. Almost $600 plus the $161 I have paid out and this company gives me the run around and doesn't provide anything. I decided to call and check up on the status today 2/6/23, and I was told that the process could not be started because the form was denied "again" because it has to come through *************************, which is the same form they denied initially that came from her. at 62. 2. In May 2004, LeAnn's cancer recurred, and she began another course of chemotherapy treatment, wherein she was hospitalized overnight every three weeks for a chemotherapy session from June 2004 through April 2005. A non-jury trial on LeAnn's bad faith claim commenced on June 24, 2014, and concluded on June 27, 2014. Called the office and **** was not available. Individuals make payments to insurance carriers to be insured in the event coverage is needed. 9. Matthew RANCOSKY, Administrator DBN of the Estate of Leann Rancosky, and Matthew Rancosky, Executor of the Estate of Martin L. Rancosky, Appellants v. WASHINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, as Successor by Merger to Conseco Health Insurance Company, Formerly Known as Capital American Life Insurance Company, Appellee. He says he is working on it; however, I met with him in January or February and gave him all the paperwork that I had submitted and he said he was handling it. 13. 5524. I told her I have received no emails, she told me ten were sent. On May 14, 2013, following a trial, a jury returned a Verdict in favor of LeAnn, following its determination that Conseco had breached the Cancer Policy. Soc., 858 F.Supp.2d 452, 459 (M.D.Pa.2012) (an insurance company's willingness to reconsider its denial does not toll the statute of limitations, as the limitations period runs from the time when Plaintiff's claim was first denied).3 The bad faith statute also begins running when the insurer sends a letter terminating the policy for failure to make timely premium payments. 8371. Brief for Appellant at 29. I never heard from them. more than three years from the time written proof is required to be given.Id. And they refuse to honor their policy. I have paid in on this picy for 4 years..I had lumbar surgery from an accident July 2021..I pay for the policy and haven't recieved anything yet..its October 2021 already..please help me.. my parents purchased pioneer policies from pioneer life from 1994 with a 250k cap .180 day, Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. ], B. The trial court took the matter under advisement, but never ruled on the Motion. Conseco's failure to conduct an meaningful investigation of LeAnn's claim when it undertook to do so in December 2006, and its refusal to reconsider its denial of coverage based on the new information provided by LeAnn in her November 30, 2006 letter, constituted new injuries to LeAnn. For costs and complete details of coverage, contact an agent. Ins. DeFazio v. Labe, 507 A.2d 410, 414 (Pa.Super.1986) ([because] judgment n.o.v. A class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
The Washington National Insurance Company, a subsidiary of CNO Financial Group, sued the HIC Marketing Group Inc. and other defendants Thursday in Indiana Southern District Court for alleged. On appeal, Rancosky raises the following issues for our review: 1. On July 18, 2005, Conseco paid $16,200.00 on LeAnn's claim for medical services she had received in 2004 and 2005, despite informing her four months earlier that the Cancer Policy had lapsed in May 2003. Washington National Insurance Company 11825 N. Pennsylvania St Carmel, IN 46032 Phone: (317)817-6400 Toll Free: (800)525-7662 Year Founded: 1911 Web: washingtonnational.com I shouldn't have to battle an insurance company who doesn't honor their contracts. We were unable to locate the remaining two policies in question. See, e.g., Jones v. Harleysville Mut. Utilizing February 4, 2003 as the inception of LeAnn's disability, the trial court determined that, by the time LeAnn's last payroll-deducted premium payment was received by Conseco, extending coverage under the Cancer Policy until May 24, 2003, the 90day waiting period had expired. Moreover, despite the occupation-related definitions for disability set forth in the Cancer Policy, Conseco provided no explanation in any of its claim forms that the term disability relates solely to the insured's ability to perform his or her occupational duties. LeAnn filled out and signed a WOP claim form on November 18, 2003. However, these parties were dismissed prior to trial and are not parties to this appeal. I had an accident, I filed a claim, no problem. Washington National Insurance Company has been in business since 1911 and is based in Carmel, Indiana. Texas policyholders have filed a class action against Jackson National Life Insurance Company claiming the group breached its contracts with variable annuity holders by improperly calculating and then charging them "surrender charges" while misrepresenting the nature of these fees. CA4 (01/03), at 2.14. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court erred as a matter of law by using standards applicable to the second prong of the test for bad faith in its determination of whether Rancosky had satisfied the first prong of the test for bad faith. The plaintiff was informed of this, the lawsuit argues, despite the fact the defendant . Ive reached out via fax number ************, Ive called to speak in person to the following number ************, and the local agent with whom *** spoken with and shared documents his telephone number is ************. Moreover, after due consideration of the competent evidence of record,20 we conclude that the evidence does not support the trial court's determination that Conseco had a reasonable basis for denying benefits to LeAnn. Called today after being charge $197.63 and get told no one is there to help and I was suppose to cancel 30 days ahead of time. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. is an American retail corporation. (citing Trial Court Opinion, 11/26/14, at 19). Privacy Policy. the expected date, if any, such disability will end.Id.6The Cancer Policy states that the term physicianMeans a person other than you or your spouse, parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, nephew or niece who: is licensed by the state to practice a healing art[;], performs services which are allowed by that license; and. Despite Conseco's decision to terminate the Cancer Policy, a Conseco internal memo, issued in January 2004, acknowledged problems in the billing process for payroll deduction policies, and indicated that Conseco is working with policyholders in an effort to allow their policy to remain current as valid claims are considered. Trial Court Opinion, 11/26/14, at 18. 8371 is deemed to have accrued at the point the claim for insurance benefits is first denied. On April 12, 2003, Conseco mailed LeAnn claim forms. Brief for Appellant at 6165. Conseco also failed to contact the Social Security Administration to determine the basis for its award of disability retirement benefits to LeAnn, and the date of such award. In a letter dated April 12, 2006, Conseco denied this claim and advised LeAnn that Your CANCER insurance coverage ended on 52403. I was diagnosed with COVID on August 25, 2021. Some Wisconsin parents have reported a shortage of nursery or baby water products, some of which contain added fluoride. Rancosky asserts that Conseco was not prejudiced by Martin's failure to submit a claim after Conseco had indicated its decision to lapse and retroactively terminate the Cancer Policy. Please try again. BBB Business Profiles may not be reproduced for sales or promotional purposes. 32. See Greene, 936 A.2d at 1187. at 3. As noted above, Conseco's duty of good faith was an ongoing vital obligation during the entire management of LeAnn's claim, and such duty required Conseco to reconsider its position and act accordingly. Conseco did not advise LeAnn that there was any problem with her request for WOP or her claim submission. Thus, the test we apply is not whether we would have reached the same result on the evidence presented, but rather, after due consideration of the evidence which the trial court found credible, whether the trial court could have reasonably reached its conclusion.Hollock v. Erie Ins. Order affirmed. However, they are still denying my hospitalization claim and have not paid out for all of my radiation and chemotherapy treatments. Decided: December 16, 2015 BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., JENKINS and MUSMANNO, JJ. See Authorization for Claim Processing Purposes, No. As a matter of policy, BBB does not endorse any product, service or business. Nor did Conseco contact the Social Security Administration to determine the basis for its award of disability retirement benefits to LeAnn, or the date of such award. A motive of self-interest or ill will may be considered in determining the second prong of the test for bad faith, i.e., whether an insurer knowingly or recklessly disregarded its lack of a reasonable basis for denying a claim. For this reason, we conclude that the competent evidence of record clearly and convincingly established that Conseco lacked a reasonable basis to deny LeAnn benefits under the Cancer Policy. Bombar v. West Am. 6. Indeed, Rancosky did not raise this issue until after the conclusion of the bad faith trial in a post-verdict Motion. ***** from Washington National/CNO was very helpful & professional. Jurisdiction relinquished. Even if this issue had not been waived, we could not grant relief to Rancosky. 295, 296 (Pa.1933) (holding that [a]n insurer will not be permitted to take advantage of the failure of the insured to perform a condition precedent contained in the policy, where the insurer itself is the cause of the failure to perform the condition.); see also Slater v. Gen. Cas. Washington National Insurance Company is not licensed and does not solicit business in the state of New York. Therefore, at the latest, the two-year bad faith statute of limitations began running on September 21, 2006. Your premium rate will not be increased by this conversion.Cancer Policy, at 1; see also id. Nor did Conseco ever tell LeAnn that, in order to waive her premiums, it simply needed a physician's statement indicating that she became disabled on or before February 24, 2003. See Hollock, 842 A.2d at 413, 41920 (noting the trial court's determination that the insurer had acted in bad faith by, inter alia, refusing to contact the insured's employer to determine the extent of her inability to complete assigned tasks). The complaint against American National was filed on Dec. 10 by plaintiffs Myra Steen and Janet Williams. At that point I stopped all contact with this person and wrote to **** (Agent) and he showed his true colors also. However, in 1998, Capital American changed its name to Conseco Health. Aug 15, 2022. Kelso made no effort to obtain further information to resolve the discrepancies presented therein, and simply reaffirmed Conseco's prior denial of coverage based on the April 21, 2003 disability date provided in the Physician Statement contained in the November 23, 2003 WOP claim form.28 See Conseco Letter 1/5/07, at 1; see also Mohney, 116 A.3d at 113536 (holding that the insurer's investigation was neither honest nor objective, because the claims adjuster focused solely on information that supported denial of the claim, while ignoring the information that supported a contrary decision). Submitting a response indicates a willingness to work with customers to make things right. I disagree with LeAnn's claim that the statute of limitations commenced when Conseco sent a letter to LeAnn dated January 5, 2007 in response to her November 30, 2006 letter. Plaintiff: Union Gospel Mission of Yakima Wash. Since when was a SURGERY a sickness? After about 6 months of going in circles with them they finally paid my lump sum cancer claim. Brief for Appellant at 31. The Cancer Policy contains a Waiver of Premium (WOP) provision, which provides as follows:Subject to the conditions of this policy, premium payments will not be required after the Policyowner is: diagnosed as having cancer 30 days or more after the Effective Date; and. Maybe there should be sanctions on their error, my personal information disclosed by this health insurance agency to WHO KNOWS!I WANT THIS CANCELED AND MY MONEY REFUNDED ASAP PLUS INFORMATION ON THE ***** THEY SENT MY PERSONAL INFO TO. I am not a doctor but I do not think that qualifies as a sickness when something tears or gets damage. Reviewed the document and had many questions! Ass'n, 936 A.2d 1178, 119091 (Pa.Super.2007)). Additionally, the WOP claim form included an authorization, signed by LeAnn, which was the same as the authorization signed by LeAnn on July 25, 2003. Filed: March 2, 2023 as 1:2023cv03027. Additionally, the WOP claim form indicates that Conseco Health reserves the right to request additional information on any claim. Waiver of Premium Claim Form, No. Ins. All rights reserved. On July 17, 2006, Conseco received the November 18, 2003 WOP claim form. Although decisions of federal district courts are not binding on Pennsylvania courts, we may still consider them persuasive authority. See Romano, 646 A.2d at 1232 (holding that bad faith conduct includes lack of good faith investigation). Although the WOP provisions of the Cancer Policy require the submission of a physician's statement, the Cancer Policy does not define physician's statement.21 However, the Cancer Policy defines a physician as a person who is (1) licensed by the state to practice a healing art; and (2) performs services which are allowed by that license and for which benefits are provided by the Cancer Policy. Ins. *Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. 22. Therefore, we cannot pay any benefits to you for the claims you submitted. Exhibit D39. My husband has paid premiums to this company since 12/01/2006 and the lack of professionalism displayed by this company is worth reporting. The Pennsylvania legislature did not provide a definition of bad faith, as that term is used in section 8371, nor did it set forth the manner in which an insured must prove bad faith. Please see attached. Conseco filed post-trial Motions, which the trial court denied. at 5759. [Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]. LEXIS 110, * *1517 (E.D.Pa.1999) (wherein the district court held that the insurer's reliance upon a physician's determination that the insured was not disabled, when the physician was not provided with the correct policy definition of disability, did not have a complete understanding of the insured's occupation, and was not familiar with the important functions involved in some aspects of the insured's occupation, provided evidence from which a fact-finder could determine that the insurer acted in bad faith when it ceased payments on the insured's claim).23 Accordingly, we conclude that the completed physician's statements received by Conseco did not indicate when LeAnn first became unable, due to cancer, to perform all the substantial and material duties of [her] regular occupation, and, therefore, did not provide Conseco with a proper basis for determining when LeAnn first became disabled pursuant to the terms of the Cancer Policy. On March 15, 2005, LeAnn called Conseco to inquire as to the status of the Cancer Policy. The Cancer Policy contains a suit limitations clause, which provides as follows:You cannot take legal action against us for benefits under this policy: within 60 days after you have sent us written proof of loss; or. at 1040. I was denied. This is not customer service and I want nothing to do with this agency. Florida AG Bill McCollum filed this suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. See Trial Court Opinion, 11/26/14, at 3 (citing Rancosky's Exhibit 75 and N.T. Wilner said relatively few cases in Washington state have been decided in early motions because many of the lawsuits filed against insurers have been consolidated in a class-action lawsuit. CA458 (06/05), at 3 (unnumbered). disabled due to cancer for more than 90 consecutive days [5] beginning on or after the date of diagnosis.After it has been determined that the Policyowner is disabled, we will waive premium payments for the period of disability, except those during the first 90 days of such period.Id. See Arlotte v. Nat. Conseco further failed to contact any of LeAnn's treating physicians to determine when LeAnn first became unable, due to her ovarian cancer, to perform the substantial and material duties of her position at USPS. The completed statement, signed by one of LeAnn's physicians on March 16, 2006, indicated that LeAnn's date[ ] of disability was February 8, 2006, due to ovarian cancer reoccurrence. The claim form included an authorization, signed by LeAnn, which was the same as the authorization signed by LeAnn on July 25, 2003. Because Rancosky failed to raise any objection to Conseco's litigation strategy or the conduct of Conseco's counsel until after trial, his claim is waived. * * *I am battling cancer. Kelso indicated that the claim payment of $16,200.00, made on July 18, 2005, had been paid in error, but that because it was Conseco's error, it would not seek reimbursement from LeAnn. A Conseco employee stated that even if it had applied the overage to LeAnn's account, it would have been insufficient to pay the full amount of premium required for the 90day waiting period extending from the April 21, 2003 disability date accepted by Conseco.17. I feel my cancer insurance coverage has been cancelled in error and believe my policy should be reinstated and reimbursed for the claims I submitted in March, 2006.LeAnn's Letter, 11/30/06, at 1. However, the Dissent bases its conclusion on Conseco's denial of monetary benefits to LeAnn and its decision to lapse the Cancer Policy, without considering LeAnn claim for bad faith based on Conseco's lack of good faith investigation. If Conseco had conducted a meaningful investigation of LeAnn's claim or undertaken to research the new information supplied by LeAnn, such as by contacting USPS, the Social Security Administration, or LeAnn's treating physicians, Conseco would have determined that LeAnn had, in fact, been unable due to cancer, to perform all the substantial and material duties of [her] regular occupation since February 4, 2003, and that she had remained on the USPS payroll beyond that date by using her accrued sick and annual leave until June 14, 2003, when her application for disability retirement status was approved. Washington National offers a full line of supplemental health and life insurance products, through a nationwide network of independent insurance agents serving middle-income Americans.. Rancosky claims that, because Conseco informed LeAnn of its decision to retroactively terminate the Cancer Policy five months after Martin's diagnosis, it would have been futile for Martin to submit his claim on a canceled policy. I want them exposed and I would also like to get paid the checks I should have gotten paid for the 6 weeks I was home and 3 follow up visits to the Dr ******* These disability companies need to be held accountable for what they do to people behind close doors. A South Korean high court ruled this past week that partners in a same-sex relationship are eligible for national health insurance coverage overturning a . 34. Commencing in 1998, when the Cancer Policy was converted to a family policy, LeAnn and Martin each became insured under the Cancer Policy as a policyowner. Cancer Policy, at 2. The reviewing court must view the record in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and resolve all doubts as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact against the moving party. Excuse me! Facing a lawsuit and political opposition, Washington State Governor Jay Inslee has delayed until April a payroll tax aimed at funding the state's first-in-the-nation public long-term care . Notably, Conseco was informed by LeAnn, at the outset of her claim, that she had been disabled, as that term is defined in the Cancer Policy, for more than 90 consecutive days from her first hospitalization on February 4, 2003. Washington National Insurance Company is based in Carmel, Indiana. Most policy service requests take an average of 13 to 15 business days to process upon receipt. The claim form submitted by LeAnn included a Cancer Physician Statement section to be completed by Physician's Office and signed by a physician. Some people use annuities as part of a retirement strategy. Thus, viewing the record in the light most favorable to Rancosky, as the nonmoving party, we cannot conclude that the trial court committed an error of law or abused its discretion in granting summary judgment in favor of Conseco and dismissing Martin's claims. Rather, the insurer must actively undertake a meaningful investigation to obtain accurate information bearing upon the coverage inquiry. I was unable to return to work and ended up retiring January 31, 2022 due to long term COVID effects. 3. Although the Cancer Policy contained a suit limitations clause, such clauses operate to limit the insured's claims arising under the policy, such as a breach of contract claim. Matthew Rancosky, Administrator DBN1 of the Estate of LeAnn Rancosky (LeAnn), and Executor of the Estate of Martin L. Rancosky (Martin)2 (collectively Rancosky), appeals from (1) the March 21, 2012 Order granting summary judgment on Martin's claims in favor of Washington National Insurance Company (Conseco), as successor by merger to Conseco Health Insurance Company (Conseco Health), formerly known as Capital American Life Insurance Company (Capital American);3 and (2) the Judgment on LeAnn's bad faith claim, entered on August 1, 2014, in favor of Conseco. Co., 932 A.2d 78, 92 (Pa.Super.2007). In addition, the evidence demonstrates, as a matter of law, that LeAnn's claim is time-barred. The policy numbers are #1-********** #2-********* #3-******* #4-******* My late Husbands name is *************************** his date of birth was 12/20/1961, he passed on 07/18/2022. In June 2008, Conseco sent LeAnn a letter indicating that it had discovered an overage in premium payments made on her account, and that it was refunding $63.95 to her. A case pitting several insurer groups against Washington Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler is set to be heard on Friday morning. Verdict, 7/3/14, at 12. In analyzing the order of [a] trial court that granted summary judgment [ ], our scope of review is plenary. See, e.g., Ash v. Continental Ins. We wish to inform you that we have communicated directly with **************** to address her additional concerns. See Bariski v. Reassure America Life Ins. Conseco raised this issue in a Motion for directed verdict during the bad faith trial. Although LeAnn advised Conseco in her initial claim forms that she had been unable to work in current occupation from February 4, 2003, until May 6, 2003, Conseco was not previously advised that LeAnn had used sick and annual leave until June 14, 2003, or that her application for disability retirement status was approved on June 14, 2003. Again I ask since when was a torn meniscus and carpal tunnel a sickness? Nor did any of Conseco's claim forms advise the Physician's Office that, after the first 24 months of LeAnn's loss (i.e., after February 4, 2005), they were required to identify her qualifications, by reason of education, training or experience, and to thereafter determine whether she was unable to perform any job for which she was qualified. On March 27, 2006, Conseco received a letter from LeAnn, dated March 24, 2006, wherein she restated that the Cancer Policy contained a WOP provision. Accordingly, Conseco deemed the Cancer Policy to have lapsed on May 24, 2003, due to non-payment of premiums prior to the expiration of the 90day waiting period on July 21, 2003. This claim form did not include a physician statement section. It's been a huge battle dealing with this company and still there is no resolution to anything. Brief for Appellant at 34. The notice should include your name and policy number.Cancer Policy, at 11. Insurers do a terrible disservice to their insureds when they fail to evaluate each individual case in terms of the situation presented and the individual affected.Bonenberger v. Nationwide Mut. See Romano, 646 A.2d at 1232 (holding that bad faith conduct includes lack of good faith investigation); see also Condio, 899 A.2d at 1142 (holding that, if evidence arises that discredits the insurer's reasonable basis for denying a claim, the insurer's duty of good faith and fair dealing requires it to reconsider its position and act accordingly, and noting that the section 8371 good faith duty is an ongoing vital obligation during the entire management of the claim). 29. [Whether t]he trial court erred by finding it was reasonable for Conseco to deny the claim on the basis that the [Cancer P]olicy had [been] forfeited and lapsed[? Judgment vacated in part. See Adamski v. Allstate Ins. On September 8, 2006, Conseco received a WOP Claim Form from LeAnn which Dr. Krivak signed and dated on August 28, 2006 and which identified the starting disability date due to cancer as 3272006New Chemo Regimen. Exhibit D432. 26. On March 21, 2012, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Conseco on all of Martin's claims. USOPC chair Susanne Lyons said Friday that the organization is suing its insurers over delays in the process of reaching agreements with the victims of Larry Nassar. International Association of Better Business Bureaus. Kelso faulted LeAnn for failing to notify Conseco that her premium payments had stopped in June of 2003, stating that this is the insured's responsibility to notify us if an employee has been terminated or went on a leave of absence. Conseco Letter, 1/5/07, at 1. Also, Ive received two phone messages from this business, appears my request is not being honored to CANCEL this policy. Jackson National Life Insurance Company and Jackson National Life Insurance Company of New York are settling a class action for $8.75 million. Ask Mike a question. [Whether t]he trial court's July 3, 2014 Verdict and Finding that Conseco had not acted in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. The Knights of Columbus is also currently embroiled in a major contract dispute lawsuit involving alleged insurance fraud The Knights of Columbus (KofC) gave a lucrative lobbying contract to a firm that employed Supreme Knight Carl Anderson's son in 2017, leading the younger Anderson to become the chief lobbyist for the organization . Washington sued Aetna for breach of contract and bad faith in 2015, saying he was denied coverage for an infusion of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) when he was 19. See id. Conseco premised its denial of claim benefits to LeAnn on the April 21, 2003 date of disability provided in the Physician Statement included in the November 18, 2003 WOP claim form. Co., 649 A.2d 680, 688 (Pa.Super.1994)). I received no apology! The parties stipulated that the contractual damages were $31,144.50. That's when it was discovered that the 10 emails they sent were all sent to a different address. 2023, International Association of Better Business Bureaus, Inc., separately incorporated Better Business Bureau organizations in the US, Canada and Mexico and BBB Institute for Marketplace Trust, Inc. All rights reserved. The Dissent also asserts that, to the extent that LeAnn asserts a bad faith claim based on Conseco's decision to lapse the Cancer Policy, the limitations period for such claim began to run either on March 9, 2005, when Conseco first advised LeAnn that [the Cancer P]olicy had lapsed, or on September 21, 2006, when Conseco denied LeAnn's request for WOP and advised her that coverage had ended on May 24, 2003. Id. $5.6B Moreover, each of the four physician statements completed by LeAnn's physicians, whether in a WOP claim form or other claim form, appears to have been completed by the same Physician's Office personnel working in the same office. The information they gave me when I was signing up was "IF FOR ANY REASON" you are out of work you can file a claim. (holding that a new limitations period begins to run from later acts of bad faith). Despite LeAnn's representation in her initial claim forms that she had been unable to work since February 4, 2003, Conseco had been presented with conflicting evidence as to whether LeAnn continued to work beyond February 4, 2003, including LeAnn's continued payroll deductions through June 14, 2003, and the differing disability dates provided in the physician's statements.