Resolution & Compliance Blog

Submit your Question: Ask the Experts


Let our people, process and systems take on the hassle of lien resolution & compliance. Getting started is easy. Just click the button to send us a case.

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

TRICARE Subrogation Claim Concern


Healthcare Lien ResolutionQuestion
When a third-party tortfeasor’s personal liability policy limits are insufficient to compensate the victim for his non-medical expense damages (i.e. past and future pain and suffering, physical impairment, disfigurement and lost wages)and pay the government's subrogation claim, whose claim to the homeowner's insurance proceeds have priority? Is this the victim or the governments’ responsibility? Must the victim first be made whole for his non-medical expense damages before the government can he or she recover medical expenses to pay for the victim's medical care? Or can the government deplete the available liability insurance monies in satisfaction of its subrogation claim and leave the victim wholly uncompensated for his non-medical expense damages? In other words, if payment of the government's subrogation claim will leave nothing to compensate the victim for his non-medical expense damages, does the government get it all and the victim get none? How are the answers to these questions different, if at all, if the victim settles with the tortfeasor before Tricare benefits have been paid to the health care providers?

TRICARE derives the authority to assert a subrogation claim under the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act (FMCRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2651-2653, which authorizes recovery of the reasonable value of medical care furnished or paid for by the United States under circumstances creating tort liability for such medical care in a third party. 32 C.F.R. § 199.12(b).

Under the circumstances of your question, I would cite the case of Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. US, 999 F.2d 581 (C.A.D.C). The Court here stated that FMCRA is silent as to priority of government's right to recover from tortfeasor medical expenses it incurred on behalf of injured employee over injured employee's right to recover non-medical damages from tortfeasor. The Court also pointed out that 42 USC 2652(c) allows the injured party to recover damages for those damages not covered under FMCRA and giving the government priority would essentially render this section useless. Ultimately the Court held the interpleaded fund would be distributed on ratable basis, such that each claimant received share of fund proportionate to their share of total judgment figure, since FMCRA was silent on question of priority of claimants' rights and since “equity is equality.” While the circumstances of this case may vary from your question, the case certainly provides some guidance.

It is also worth noting that in a case where the injured party pursued the tort claim and the government passively waited for reimbursement, courts have required an equitable reduction in the government’s claim. Mosey v. U.S., D.Nev.1998, 3 F.Supp.2d 113. As a general matter, in our experience, the government is willing to take such matters into consideration and may adjust accordingly so the injured party receives some compensation.

If a settlement took place prior as mentioned in your second question, the priority determination would arguably be the same. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for the question.




Currently, there are no comments. Be the first to post one!
Post Comment
Website (optional)

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics


Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Ask the Experts

The Lien Resolution Experts. Garretson Resolution Group assists the settlement community by evaluating the settling parties' affirmative obligation and satisfying health care providers’ interests in personal injury, wrongful death, workers compensation, and mass tort settlements. We provide the following Healthcare Lien Resolution Services: Medicare Lien Resolution, Medicaid Lien Resolution, Private Health Care Lien Resolution, ERISA Lien Resolution, Hospital Lien Resolution, Provider Lien Resolution, VA Lien Resolution, TRICARE Lien Resolution, Indian Health Services Lien Resolution

The Medicare Set Aside (MSA) Experts. In addition to satisfying Medicare's past interests -- reimbursement for conditional payments -- GRG expertly evaluates and resolves Medicare's future interests in workers' compensation and third party liability cases by establishing Medicare Set Asides when appropriate. Backed by years of experience in working with Medicare, our innovative MSA Decision Engine and dedicated team of attorneys, analysts and RNs make GRG the industry's most trusted authority.

The MSP Consulting and Mandatory Insurer Reporting Experts. The Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (MMSEA) took effect in 2010, significantly changing resolution obligations and adding more penalties for non-compliance to the MSP Statute. Companies across the country look to GRG to ensure Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) compliance and serve as their MMSEA Mandatory Insurer Reporting Agent.

The Complex Settlement Administration Experts. Parties are confronted with complex master settlement agreements that include complicated disclosure guidelines, stringent participation requirements, strict timelines, and constantly changing ethics rules. In the midst of that, attorneys must ensure that healthcare liens are resolved and bankruptcy and probate requirements are satisfied. GRG engineers and executes comprehensive settlement programs built upon our expertise in: Special Master and Settlement Allocation Services, Claims Administration, Medical Record Review, Fund Administration, Claimant Education, National Probate Coordination, National Bankruptcy Coordination and Healthcare Lien Resolution.

For more information please visit GRG's Homepage.