ComplaintsforThe Lanier Law Firm, PLLC

• Initial Complaint

  10/04/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  ON MAY 27 ***** I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE LANIER LAW FIRM STATING I HAD BEEN AWARDED A SETTLEMENT ON MY CASE THAT I HAD BEEN WORKING WITH LANIER FOR A FEW YEARS.SETTLEMENT TOTAL GROSS $117,310.00 I'VE BEEN CALLING THEM MANY TIMES. IT SEEMS MANY OF MY CONTACTS HAVE BEEN LEAVING.TWO WEEKS AGO I CALLED AND SPOKE WITH ******** AND SHE SAID SHE WOULD SEND ME A LETTER WITH THE BREAKDOWN. I'M STILL WAITING FOR LETTER.I'M A SENIOR CITIZEN AND I WILL BE DEAD BEFORE I SEE ANY FUNDS.NEED HELP TO RESOLVE.

  Business response

  03/08/2024

  Dear BBB of Metro **,

   

  Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.  We unfortunately did not receive either the original notification letter (10/4/22) or the Second Notice letter (10/18/22) and were just made aware of this complaint to your office on Tuesday, February 27, 2024. 

   

  Please note that the concerns which prompted the original complaint have been resolved and *** ******** settlement has been fully paid to her as of 12/11/23. *** ******** frustration over the length of time to receive her settlement funds was felt by tens of thousands of Roundup claimants across the country, as well as many law firms including our office.  Until recently, all disbursements for ******** eligible Roundup claimants were on hold pending a decision from The Centers for ******** and ******** Services (CMS) and the ********** of ******* ***** with regard to ******** lien resolution.  This issue has now been resolved and ****************** has received her settlement funds. Our law firm has satisfied all our obligations under our retainer and her file with our office is now complete and closed.

   

    Overview of the Roundup Litigation and ******** Lien Resolution

   

  The Roundup mass tort litigation has been ongoing for many years. Each case involves a claimant who is asserting that they contracted Non-******** lymphoma ***** as a result of exposure to Roundup weed killer. Since every case concerns an *** diagnosis, many cases involve expensive medical treatment. Many of our clients are insured by ********. ******** has an automatic statutory right to recover the cost of their expenses out of the resolution of the claims. However, if ******** sought to engage in a case-by-case review and reimbursement of all claim related medical expenses, this would cripple ********. Moreover, such practices would additionally operate to severely deplete the recoveries of many claimants.  Plaintiffs attorneys in mass tort actions have an obligation to ensure that lien resolution is conducted properly.  In this case, our firm hired ******************** (******) to oversee lien resolution. Numerous other law firms engaged ****** as well. The result is that many tens of thousands of claimants are having their liens resolved through ******.

   

  Over more than two years ago, ****** negotiated with ******** to arrive at a lien resolution Global model. A key part of the ******** Global Model was an agreement that a claimants ******** lien would be capped at a certain percentage.  This agreement to a cap would allow funds to be disbursed pending final resolution of the ******** lien. 

   

  Under the global model and ********s published protocols and guidelines, which ******** calls its Points of ************** ******** is due one lump sum for an approved law firm Universe (i.e. group) of settling claimants. Under ********s Points of ************** ******** acknowledged that many claimants would need to be capped, or compromised, at 30% of their gross settlement award due to high lien values for *** medical treatment. ****** and other Lien Resolution Administrators (LRAs) have been operating under the Points of Understanding for nearly two years. However, after operating pursuant to this understanding with CMS for over two years, in September of 2022, CMS notified Lien Resolution vendors across the nation that CMS was revoking its prior agreement to cap ******** liens. ****** sent notice to Plaintiffs counsel across the nation, which stated the following:

   

  On September 21, 2022, ******** changed course without notice and rescinded the feature of the global model that allowed for claimants liens to be compromised at 30% of their gross settlement award. ********s action essentially paused ARCHERs ability to finalize claimants under the ******** model.

   

  See Ex. A, annexed hereto (emphasis added).

   

  As reflected in ARCHERs letter, ****** immediately challenged ********s decision, and CMS is currently taking far more time than the parties in this litigation had hoped to reach its final resolution.

   

  In September of 2022, my office had begun the process of disbursing certain eligible settled Roundup claims.  *** ******** claim was among those clients with funds available for distribution. These claimants were individuals whose liens were either completely resolved or who had a lien holdback put in place that was deemed by ****** to be sufficient to account for any potential Medical expense related liens, including state and federal statutory liens.  Due to the extended period of time it takes to resolve all potential liens, it is standard operating procedure in mass tort settlements to disburse part of a claim with an amount held back to resolve any potential outstanding liens.  

   

  As part of my offices standard disbursement protocol, we sent ****************** a letter along with a distribution statement that detailed her settlement breakdown, and included a payment election form.  *** ******** distribution statement detailed a 30% lien holdback by ****** pending resolution of her potential ******** lien.  As set forth above, the lien holdback was set at 30% by the claims administrator due to an agreement that had been in place for the past 2 plus years between CMS and lien administrators for Roundup claimants.

   

  ****************** signed the distribution sheet and payment election form on 10/8/22 and it was received in our office on 10/17/22.  Unfortunately, before funds could be disbursed to most claimants, including to ******************, CMS rescinded the feature of the global model that allowed for claimants liens to be capped at 30%.  This sudden change in position by CMS effectively halted all Roundup settlement disbursements for ******** eligible claimants, including ******************.  Indeed, ****** advised our law firm to hold off on disbursing any funds to any claimants not yet disbursed who were ******** eligible until further communication.

   

  ARCHERs rationale was logical. Until ****** could determine what the ultimate potential liability may be, ****** did not want counsel disbursing funds. If a law firm were to disburse funds to a client without resolving the ******** lien or holding back sufficient funds to account for the ******** lien, CMS could initiate an action against my office, or even worse the client individually, for reimbursement under the ******** Secondary Payer Act.   The attached memo/talking points from the Senior Director of Federal & Regulatory Affairs at the ******************** for ******* (AAJ) details CMSs abrupt change and its effect on Roundup settlement distribution. See Ex. B, annexed hereto (Talking Points Memo from the Senior Director of Federal & Regulatory Affairs of AAJ regarding the Roundup ******** Lien Resolution Issue). This memo was distributed following an AAJ call the first week of December 2022 consisting of over 100 attorneys across the country who represent Roundup claimants in this litigation dealing with this same issue.

   

   

  ****** sent additional correspondence on November 29, 2022, to our firm and other law firms across the nation   ****** advised that it is waiting for a final determination from CMS and that the matter was referred to the ********** of ******* ***** for guidance. See Ex. C.

   

  On February 22, 2023.  ****** provided our office with the following:

   

  1. A copy of a letter from ****** dated February 21, 2023 to the Administrator for the Centers for ******** and ******** Services, U.S. ********** of ****** and ***** Services, and the Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, ********** of *******, (Attached as Exhibit D)

   

  2. A memo entitled ROUNDUP Injured Claimant Update on ******** Lien Resolution (Attached as *********). 

   

  Notably, ****** had implored the federal government to take action to resolve the delays caused by CMSs decision to upend the global compromise of ******** liens for cancer victims across the nation. ****** addressed the impasse caused by CMS, stating:

   

  bureaucratic impasse that is harming vulnerable ******** beneficiaries across the nation.  For nearly six months now, the Administration has been reviewing a plan to permit global compromise of ******** Secondary Payer (MSP) liens on mass-tort settlements stemming from injuries associated with exposure to the herbicide Roundup.  Because the ongoing delay in resolving this issue is causing significant harm to cancer victims and other deserving ******** beneficiaries nationwide, we urge you to resolve this impasse without further delay.

   

  The letter further states:

   

  CMS initially advised ****** that the review would take weeks, but five months have now passed since CMS reversed its position, and the uncertainty among the affected beneficiaries is deepening.  ****** is unable to distribute settlement funds to beneficiaries receiving Roundup settlements or to pay their MSP liens, to the growing frustration of ******** beneficiaries and their advocates. (Emphasis added)

   

  It was not until this past summer of 2023, approximately 11 months after CMS halted the global lien resolution process, that CMS agreed to reinstate the original Global Resolution Model and 30% ******** lien cap. This occurred only after CMS and ********** of ******* attorneys worked together with numerous parties to negotiate a resolution that had halted the disbursement of settlement proceeds for thousands of Roundup claimants across *****************.  Thereafter, ****** began resolving the ******** liens through the Global model, and, as a result, our firm was able to start disbursing settlement funds toward the end of 2023. Therefore, *** ******** final settlement funds were mailed out to her on 12/11/23.  I am herein confirming that ****************** received and deposited her settlement funds. 

   

              Our office had numerous communications with ******************, over the phone as well as in writing.  We tracked every single correspondence with ****************** in our proprietary database. We diligently answered every single question she raised. It is critical to note that we informed ****************** and all of our ******** eligible clients about the reason for the delay in ******** lien resolution and that ********s rebuke of the global lien resolution process has resulted in a delayed disbursement of her settlement funds.  Like many of our clients, ****************** was understandably frustrated with the delay created by CMSs abrupt change and lack of information regarding when a decision would be forthcoming. Every single employee at our law firm shared her frustration.  

   

  In closing, it should be noted that I was hired to open my law firms ******** office in September of 2004. We have faced one complaint with the ** BBB in 20 years of business. However, even 1 complaint is 1 too many. It is unfortunate that our law firm has faced this complaint because of a delay in disbursing settlement proceeds a delay caused by ********s rebuke of a global lien resolution program, which was entirely outside of our firms control, as evidenced by the attached exhibits.

   

  Respectfully submitted,

  ************************  

        

   

   

  
  

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩