Post by messi05 on Jan 23, 2024 22:58:29 GMT -5
Considering the failure in the duty to provide information to the consumer, judge Renata Martins de Carvalho, from the 6th Civil Court of São Paulo, outright condemned a health plan to pay for the entire treatment of a client, including surgery, in a hospital with which it did not there was a commercial agreement for prostate cancer surgery. In this case, the health plan client began medical follow-up at a hospital specializing in cancer. When the doctor determined that surgery would be necessary, the health plan did not authorize the procedure there. According to the health plan, the commercial agreement with the hospital did not include that specific surgery.
Represented by lawyer Ricardo Amin Abrahão Nacle , the client Buy Phone Number List asked in court that the health plan be obliged to pay for all treatment at that hospital, including surgery. The client claimed that since contracting the health plan, he was never informed that the hospital could not perform such surgery or that he had been disqualified from the plan. When judging the case, judge Renata de Carvalho considered that there was a failure in the duty of information on the part of the health plan.
According to her, the law that regulates health plans provides that any hospital deaccreditation must be informed to the consumer 30 days in advance, which, according to her, did not occur in this case. "Therefore, as the author is not informed about the disqualification, or even if the disqualification has not been configured, the granting of the anticipatory request is a measure of rigor due to loyalty and trust, as well as the duty of information to the consumer, especially, given the seriousness of the disease", he concluded.
Represented by lawyer Ricardo Amin Abrahão Nacle , the client Buy Phone Number List asked in court that the health plan be obliged to pay for all treatment at that hospital, including surgery. The client claimed that since contracting the health plan, he was never informed that the hospital could not perform such surgery or that he had been disqualified from the plan. When judging the case, judge Renata de Carvalho considered that there was a failure in the duty of information on the part of the health plan.
According to her, the law that regulates health plans provides that any hospital deaccreditation must be informed to the consumer 30 days in advance, which, according to her, did not occur in this case. "Therefore, as the author is not informed about the disqualification, or even if the disqualification has not been configured, the granting of the anticipatory request is a measure of rigor due to loyalty and trust, as well as the duty of information to the consumer, especially, given the seriousness of the disease", he concluded.