|
|
|
A Service of OnQue Technologies, Inc. |
|
Are You Using The
Safest Method To Deliver COBRA Notices? |
February 11, 2004 Santa Rosa,
CA |
The COBRA administration
issue that most often lands employers and plan administrators in court is
whether COBRA notices were properly provided to plan participants and qualified
beneficiaries. Under current law, the two most important notices - the initial
notice and the election notice - must be provided in a "good faith manner that
is reasonably calculated to ensure actual receipt of the material." No specific
method of delivery is required, but the DOL suggests that using first-class
mail is sufficient. Because delivery of notices is the most crucial step in
proper COBRA administration, we believe there's a right way to do it
and
then there are the other ways.
This COBRA Tip explains the safest method
to use for delivery of COBRA notices - the one that affords the most protection
from expensive litigation and penalties for COBRA violations. It also discusses
the pitfalls of other methods, which although not unlawful, are definitely not
recommended. Delivery Of COBRA Notices
The only legal duty
imposed on plan administrators is to make a "good faith" attempt to notify
beneficiaries of their COBRA rights. To determine if employers have complied
with the law, courts look to whether the notice in question was provided by a
method "reasonably calculated" to result in receipt. Proof of actual receipt is
not required.
The Initial Notice: Federal law states: "The group
health plan shall provide, at the time of commencement of coverage under the
plan, written notice to each covered employee and spouse of the employee, if
any, of their rights" to continuation coverage. It does not mandate how this
notice is to be provided.
The Election Notice: Federal law states: "The
administrator shall notify in the case of a qualifying event
any qualified
beneficiary with respect to such event, of such beneficiary's rights." Again,
no specific method of notification is required.
Methods of delivery:
Methods used by employers and plan administrators to inform beneficiaries
of their COBRA rights include telephone and in-person oral conversations, hand
delivery of documents, electronic transmissions, and various methods of
mailing. Each practice has inherent drawbacks, some more risky than others.
First, we'll discuss the preferred method for delivery of COBRA notices; then
we'll tell you which practices to avoid.
- Sending notices by mail: Of all the various
options, mailing notices is the most prudent business practice. It complies
with the good faith requirement of the law and, when done correctly, provides a
reliable method of proving that notice was properly given within the required
time limits and to the necessary parties. But we don't recommend simply tossing
the envelope into the nearest mailbox. To prove that timely and adequate notice
of COBRA rights was given, the documents should be mailed via U.S. Postal
Service first-class mail with a Certificate of Mailing. When this method is
used, it is presumed that the document was, in fact, delivered and the
Certificate proves when and to whom it was mailed.
Note: Don't
confuse a Certificate of Mailing with a Return Receipt request. Proof of actual
receipt is not required, and using the Return Receipt method might actually
backfire by proving affirmatively that delivery was improperly made. If the
notice were returned to the sender without a signature, the employer would
likely incur a further legal duty to confirm the beneficiary's correct mailing
address. The use of a Certificate of Mailing involves no return receipt, yet
fulfills the legal obligation to send the notice to the last known mailing
address and provides proof of mailing.
- Notice by telephone: For obvious reasons,
this is the least desirable method of providing required COBRA information.
Yet, more than one court has upheld phone notification as legally sufficient.
As recently as January of this year, a federal judge ruled that COBRA
information given during a telephone conversation between the widow of a former
employee and the employer's representative constituted valid notification of
COBRA rights. In reaching his decision, the judge relied on the fact that
ERISA, the federal law governing COBRA administration, does not require COBRA
election notices to be in writing. But the outcome in this case really hinged
on the fact that the widow readily admitted she had received all the required
COBRA information in that telephone conversation - other employers might not be
so fortunate.
- Verbal notice at discharge meeting: Often,
employers will inform employees in a face-to-face meeting of their right to
continued health insurance under the group plan at the same time they terminate
their employment. Such oral communications are ill advised. The same problem of
proof exists in this circumstance as it does when information is given by
phone. A New York federal judge recently ruled against an employer - who
insisted that COBRA election rights were properly given to a beneficiary at his
discharge meeting - because there was no independent evidence to support the
employer's assertion.
Relying on verbal election notices is extremely
risky for the obvious reason that delivery and content of such notices is
difficult, if not impossible, to prove. There is no record of the date, the
accuracy of the contents of the notice, nor the identity of the individuals
notified. Also, oral notices given to employees do not constitute legally
adequate notification of COBRA rights to covered spouses. And, of course,
reliable recordkeeping is not possible when notices are given verbally.
- Notice by hand delivery: Too often,
employees are handed written COBRA election notices in person at a termination
meeting. Although this method of notification to the employee may be
sufficient, it does not provide legally adequate notice of COBRA rights to a
covered spouse.
The potential for litigation in this situation was
painfully illustrated in a recent court decision that went against an employer
who handed a COBRA notice to a divorced employee to give to his ex-wife. The
former spouse claimed that she had never received the notice, and so she
unwittingly incurred medical expenses after being dropped from the group plan.
The employee claimed that he "delivered" the COBRA notice to his ex-wife by
putting it in his children's suitcase after a visit. The court stated that
employers and administrators must make a good faith effort to provide COBRA
notices, even though the law doesn't specify the manner in which the notice
must be made. The judge noted, "The very nature of divorce forecloses hand
delivery as a reasonable attempt to comply with the COBRA notification
requirements."
- Electronic notification: Employee benefit
plans may now use electronic media such as email to satisfy the notice
requirements of COBRA. But before firing off email messages to employees and
beneficiaries, be aware that complex legal standards must be met when
furnishing and retaining electronic documents. Plan administrators must take
steps to ensure that the electronic system utilized for providing COBRA
documents will reasonably result in the actual receipt of the required
information, while at the same time, confidentiality of personal information
must be protected.
Electronic notices may be sent to employees either
at the workplace or at non-workplace sites. Those who work at home or travel,
or who otherwise do not have workplace computer access, may receive electronic
notices if they have access to the employer's information system. Spouses and
beneficiaries, who would receive COBRA notices away from the workplace, must
affirmatively consent to receive them in electronic form, and provide the
address for receipt. But that consent is not legally sufficient until the
employer or plan administrator provides a statement that clearly
describes:
- The documents that are permitted to be sent
electronically;
- The right to withdraw consent at any
time;
- The procedures for withdrawing consent and updating
receipt information;
- The software and hardware requirements;
and
- The right to ask for and receive a paper version of
any electronic document.
In addition to these complex conditions for legally
sufficient electronic delivery, employers and plan administrators must also
comply with legal standards for retaining and maintaining records of electronic
transmissions. They must ensure the accuracy and authenticity of the electronic
notices and maintain a safe system for storage and inspection. And only if the
electronic recordkeeping system complies with the law, may paper records be
destroyed after they are transferred to the electronic system. Properly
adhering to these strict requirements may make it difficult to comply with
ERISA notification time limits. Conclusion: It is not
enough to comply with the minimum legal requirement to "provide" COBRA
notifications to all qualified beneficiaries. Simply using whichever method of
delivery may be convenient at any given time is courting serious compliance
problems. Employers and administrators must have in place written procedures
that set out precisely which method is being used to provide COBRA notices and
that method must be consistently utilized. We can't stress enough the
importance of choosing the safest method of delivery: U.S. Postal Service
first-class mail with Certificate of Mailing. This method is consistent with
DOL guidelines, while providing reliable documentation of
compliance. |
| How COBRA OnQue Software
Handles These Issues: |
- COBRA OnQue automatically generates written
notices when required.
- The software offers a choice of delivery methods,
but recommends U. S. Postal Service first-class mail with Certificate of
Mailing.
- COBRA OnQue makes a record of the method of
delivery used.
|
|
This information is provided by
OnQue Technologies, Inc. for educational purposes only and does not constitute
legal advice. If legal advice or other professional assistance is required, the
services of a competent professional should be sought. |
|
|
Click here to view past
tips: Tips
Archive |
|
|
|
|
| As seen in Health Insurance
Underwriter Magazine |
 |
|
Copyright © 2004
OnQue Technologies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. |
|