Think your job life insurance is solid? Just what I have been saying the very wealthy get federal laws passed that protect them and cost the every day person. McCain or Obama going to fix this? lol

Employers use federal law to deny benefits By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 20 minutes ago

Employers use federal law to deny benefits - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON - Dying of cancer, Thomas Amschwand did everything he was told to make sure his wife would collect on the life insurance policy he had through his employer.

"He was obsessed with dotting every `i' and crossing every `t'," Melissa Amschwand-Bellinger recalled about her husband, who died in 2001 at age 30.

But Spherion Corp., the temporary staffing company where Amschwand worked, told Amschwand-Bellinger she would not receive any of the $426,000 in benefits she believed she was due. When she went to court, Spherion succeeded in getting her lawsuit thrown out. The Supreme Court on June 27 refused to review the case.

Amschwand-Bellinger received a refund of the few thousand dollars in insurance premiums she and her husband dutifully had paid. The total, she said, would not cover the costs of his funeral.

The story has played out often under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Designed to protect employee benefits, the law has been used by employers as a shield against suits.

Federal appeals courts, interpreting Supreme Court decisions dating to 1993, consistently have said companies that offer health, life and retirement benefits under ERISA cannot be sued for large amounts of money, or damages. Instead, they can be sued only for typically smaller sums such as Amschwand's insurance premiums.

I just read this in the paper and was thinking about posting it. Good job. mlurp

What I thought about while reading it was the natural or man made disasters that have taken place. Often insurance companies try to stave you off till they can start declaring bankruptcy. So the best thing to do is sue the insurance company if you don't have cash in hand the next day.
How is this law (which I didn't even know existed-isn't that funny?) going to affect those types of situations?

ON the other side of the coin, this will hurt insurers in the long run, because why would anyone put their faith in them ever again after seeing this happen to a friend or neighbor? Be better off to bury money in the back yard or put it in bonds.

__________________
"All right, then, I'll go to hell!"
-Huck Finn

I trust the bank for now and the 2 stocks I have which I checked a little while ago. I'm up $207 over yesterday.

But soon I shall take most of my savings out of the bank. B-4 we with others blow Iran to dust.

I read about this on Yahoo a couple days ago. I can assure you "Chuck" is going to be the one asking why I took my investments out of his care next quarter.

The Bush administration has argued that the appeals courts are misreading the precedents and has asked the high court at least twice to clarify the earlier rulings. So far it has refused.

Congress, which could amend ERISA to make clear such suits are allowed, also has taken no action.

Congress and the President should take action to amend the law. "Asking the court" to do something is an empty gesture.
Unfortunately, I doubt that there will be any change in the situation after the election next year. Politicians (democrat or republican) often turn a deaf ear to the common man while listening intently to lobbying groups.
Insurance companies have a lobbying group.


Wasn't sure what you were referring to until I read the article.