Judge announces arbitrary modification of Unimed’s collective health plan

The beneficiary of Unimed’s collective health plan was able to declare arbitrariness in the amendment introduced by the company. The decision was made by Law Judge Sandro Nogueira de Barros Leite, of the Seventh Civil Court of São José do Rio Preto/SP. For a justice of the peace, contractual clauses cannot be changed judicially, except for a valid reason to authorize intervention.

Unimed informed the beneficiary that her plan would be cancelled and that to join a new one the value was much higher.(Photo: Pexels)

The patient filed a lawsuit claiming she had a Unimed health plan and in November was surprised by a letter telling her that her plan would be canceled and that if she wanted to continue she would have to join a new plan, with a much higher plan. the value.

Thus, it required the declaration of illegality of the unilateral cancellation of the health plan, as well as the arbitrariness of the amendment made by the defendant, at a much higher level than the permissible level.

Analyzing the case, the judge pointed out that a contract concluded in accordance with all the presumptions and requirements necessary for its validity, according to the principle of mandatory force of the contract, must be respected, for the security of legal trade, as if its clauses were a law between parts.

According to the judge, contractual clauses can be changed, judicially, only for good reason, due to flagrant violation, authorization to intervene.

“In the case of the case file, after information that its collective plan will terminate due to an economic and financial imbalance in the collective plan, the plaintiff received notice that the exercise of portability would be possible, and the amount to be considered BRL 709, 68, which until then was in accordance with the law And without arbitrariness were it not for the fact that it was established that the actual fee of portability was R$1518.00.”

The judge pointed out that the amount paid in the monthly fee does not match what was stated in the statement, and even less with what was collected in a previous collective agreement.

Thus, he declared the arbitrariness of the amendment made by Unimed and condemned the company for unnecessarily refunding the payments.

Lawyer Rubens Amaral Bergaminifrom the office Rubens Amaral Bergamini Law Firm, working on the cause.

look at it Rule.

_______