Wexford Med., P.C. v Commerce Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 51193(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
“The complaint alleges that “health services” were rendered to the assignor on January 9, 2003, that a bill for such services was “timely received” by defendant insurer, and that defendant failed to properly deny the bill within 30 days or request additional verification. Inasmuch as plaintiff was required to submit the proof of claim no later than 45 days after the services were rendered (see 11 NYCRR 65-1.1[d]; New York & Presbyt. Hosp. v Country-Wide Ins. Co., 17 NY3d 586, 589-590 ), and the claim accrued 30 days thereafter (see Matter of Travelers Indem. Co. of Conn. v Glenwood Med., P.C., 48 AD3d 319 ), this action, commenced on September 18, 2009, is barred by the governing six-year statute of limitations”
By the way, if this was an endorsed complaint, would the pleader be non-suited without the movant providing evidence that the bills themselves were “received” and that thirty days elapsed?
Or what happens if a bill is denied prior to the 30-day deadline to adjust a bill? The Courts have held that this is what starts the SOL clock:
New York Med. Rehab., P.C. v Travelers Ins. Co., 2013 NY Slip Op 23218 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2013)
“A defendant asserting a statute of limitations defense must establish that the plaintiff commenced the action after the expiration of the statute of limitations. A no-fault cause of action accrues when payment of no-fault benefits becomes “overdue” (see Insurance Law § 5106 [a]; see also Matter of Travelers Indem. Co. of Conn. v Glenwood Med., P.C., 48 AD3d 319, 320 ; Mandarino v Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co., 37 AD3d 775 ; Acupuncture Works, P.C. v MVAIC, 27 Misc 3d 131[A], 2010 NY Slip Op 50646[U] [App Term, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2010]). For statute of limitations purposes, plaintiff’s claim accrued on January 14, 2003, the date that defendant issued and mailed its denial of claim form”