A recent federal case, Marrow v. E.R. Carpenter Co., Inc., highlights the importance of both proper COBRA notices and the need to show real harm when challenging them. In this case, a former employee sued her employer (the plan administrator) claiming that errors in her COBRA election notice kept her from electing continuation coverage and left her with unpaid medical and dental expenses. The dispute centered on two alleged notice flaws: the absence of a clear deadline for returning the election form and mixed messages about whether the first premium payment had to be sent with that form.
When the court later reviewed those claims, it dismissed the case. The key issue was not whether mistakes existed, but whether those mistakes caused the employee’s losses. The court found no such connection. The employee acknowledged she understood she had 60 days to elect coverage, knew a premium payment would be required, and could afford it, but she never attempted to enroll. Because she could not show that the unclear deadlines or instructions influenced her decision, the court determined the notice deficiencies did not lead to her uninsured expenses.
Employer Considerations
While courts do not always impose penalties for COBRA notice violations, especially when no harm can be shown, they have wide discretion to do so. The safest path for employers and plan administrators is to ensure that COBRA notices are complete, accurate, and easy to follow. Clear communication can help avoid disputes, reduce litigation risk, and support a smooth continuation coverage process.