UnitedHealth Group ordered to pay $165 million over deceptive sales practices
The judgeâs order, announced this month by the attorney general in
The case dealt with allegations of cheating consumers and violating consumer protection laws primarily during the years leading up to 2019, when
âFor years, the defendants preyed on financially vulnerable individuals, deceiving them into buying products they didnât need or couldnât afford,â Attorney General
âWe disagree with the
The case dealt with what are known as âsupplementalâ health plans, where patients receive a lump sum of money if they suffer certain triggering health problems.
These policies sometimes are known as âdread diseaseâ coverage, with names like âcancer-onlyâ or âcritical illness,â where patients with certain major medical issues receive cash payouts they can use for any purpose. The benefits are distinct from health insurance policies that cover the cost of medical and hospital services and are the mainstay at UnitedHealthcare, the massive health benefits division at
Judge
The judge found evidence that beginning in 2012 and continuing through 2016, if not later, the company bundled supplemental health plans with traditional insurance coverage so that clients didnât know they were buying the supplemental coverage.
âAgents used marketing materials that showed consumers a single premium for a combination of major medical and supplemental policies, hid the name Chesapeake from consumers and ... bundled policies together with a single quote,â the judge wrote. âAgents were trained to hide the costs for the individual policies so customers did not understand what they were purchasing.â
Civil penalties also were warranted, the judge wrote, for company web pages with false representations that agents provided objective guidance. She found the company also sent an automated email deceptively asserting that agents could offer a wide variety of options from numerous companies.
Kazanjian ordered about
Supplemental health plans have been controversial over the years, with critics saying they pay out a much lower share of premiums to consumers than regulations require of traditional health insurers.
In her order, Kazanjian quoted a health economist and expert witness for the defense who testified that consumers benefit from these health plans not solely due to claims they actually receive, but also from âthe peace of mind from knowing that they will be financially covered if a triggering event occurs.â
The economist conceded, however, âthat a consumer is not likely to receive peace of mind from a product that they unknowingly purchased,â the judge wrote.
©2025 The Minnesota Star Tribune. Visit startribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC



California Dems Propose âSlush Fundâ To âTrump-Proofâ Illegal Migrants From Deportation Amid Deadly Wildfires
McCaughey: Shake up U.S. health policy
Advisor News
- Most Americans surveyed cut or stopped retirement savings due to the current economy
- Why you should discuss insurance with HNW clients
- Trump announces health care plan outline
- House passes bill restricting ESG investments in retirement accounts
- How pre-retirees are approaching AI and tech
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company Trademark Application for âEMPOWER READY SELECTâ Filed: Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company
- Retirees drive demand for pension-like income amid $4T savings gap
- Reframing lifetime income as an essential part of retirement planning
- Integrity adds further scale with blockbuster acquisition of AIMCOR
- MetLife Declares First Quarter 2026 Common Stock Dividend
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Reed: 2026 changes ABLE accounts benefit potential beneficiaries
- Sickest patients face insurance denials despite policy fixes
- Far fewer people buy Obamacare coverage as insurance premiums spike
- MARKETPLACE 2026 OPEN ENROLLMENT PERIOD REPORT: NATIONAL SNAPSHOT, JANUARY 12, 2026
- Trump wants Congress to take up health plan
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News