USHEALTH Group, a Fort Worth-based insurance holding company, has been the subject of multiple class action lawsuits over unsolicited telemarketing, disputes over denied health insurance claims, a state regulatory sanction for mishandling claims in Illinois, and a steady volume of consumer complaints alleging that agents misrepresented what its policies actually cover. The company sells insurance through subsidiaries across 33 states, and the pattern of allegations has held remarkably steady across two decades.
What USHEALTH Actually Sells
Understanding the litigation starts with the product. USHEALTH Group’s flagship plans, marketed under names like PremierAdvantage and HealthAccess Plus, are fixed indemnity plans. They pay a set dollar amount for covered services rather than covering the full cost of care.1USHEALTH Group. PremierAdvantage Fixed Indemnity Plans2USHEALTH Group. HealthAccess Plus Fixed Indemnity Plan They are classified as “excepted benefit plans” under the Affordable Care Act and do not qualify as minimum essential coverage. Consumers who believed they were buying comprehensive health insurance have repeatedly discovered gaps only when a claim comes back denied or paid at a fraction of the bill.
The products are underwritten by three USHEALTH subsidiaries: Freedom Life Insurance Company of America, National Foundation Life Insurance Company, and Enterprise Life Insurance Company. Sales run through USHEALTH Advisors, LLC, which over a six-year stretch ending in 2020 contracted with more than 20,000 independent agents.3FindLaw. Hirsch v. USHEALTH Advisors LLC
Telemarketing Class Actions
The largest cluster of lawsuits against USHEALTH involves the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the federal statute that restricts robocalls, autodialed calls, and unsolicited telemarketing.
Hirsch v. USHealth Advisors
Aaron Hirsch filed a class action in March 2018 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The complaint alleged USHEALTH Advisors and USHEALTH Group used automatic telephone dialing systems and prerecorded messages to call consumers whose numbers were on the National Do Not Call Registry. Hirsch’s own cell number had been registered since 2003.4ClassAction.org. Hirsch v. USHEALTH Advisors LLC et al., Complaint The suit sought statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 per violation.5ClassAction.org. USHealth Advisors Telemarketing Complaints Lawsuit The parties mediated twice, and the case was dismissed at the request of both sides in late December 2020 and early January 2021. No settlement terms were made public.6CourtListener. Hirsch v. USHealth Advisors LLC, Docket
Kramer v. USHealth Advisors
A second TCPA class action produced a bruising ruling for the company in November 2024. The plaintiff, suing in the Southern District of Illinois, alleged USHEALTH Advisors kept sending marketing texts despite repeated opt-out requests. In one exchange, the plaintiff responded to a pitch with “No DUCK OFF,” and the messages continued. On November 25, 2024, the court denied USHEALTH’s motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff had alleged “more than enough” to state a claim under Section 227(c) of the TCPA. The judge also held the plaintiff did not have to be personally listed on the National Do Not Call Registry to sue, and noted that the pattern of ignored opt-outs suggested the company may lack a Do Not Call policy entirely.7TCPA World. USHealth Advisors Stuck in TCPA Class Action Suit Over Failure to Honor Revocation Opt-Outs
Sessoms v. USHealth Advisors
Cynthia Sessoms filed a TCPA class action in the Eastern District of North Carolina alleging prerecorded telemarketing calls. USHEALTH moved to force the dispute into arbitration and initially lost at the trial court. In May 2026, the Fourth Circuit reversed. Applying Delaware law, the appeals court held that USHEALTH could enforce an arbitration clause in the Terms of Use of a third-party lead-generation website, even though USHEALTH had not signed that agreement, because it qualified as a third-party beneficiary of the website’s business model. The case was sent back with instructions to compel arbitration, effectively preventing a class-wide proceeding.8CaseMine. Sessoms v. USHealth Advisors LLC9Greenspoon Marder. Greenspoon Marder Secures Fourth Circuit Reversal in Sessoms v. USHealth Advisors
Claim Denial and Coverage Lawsuits
Wallant v. Freedom Life Insurance
In a Florida class action, plaintiffs Kim Wallant and Louis Borek alleged that Freedom Life improperly denied and delayed health insurance claims in violation of Florida law and the company’s own policy terms. They also attacked a dispute-resolution provision in the policy forms as unconscionable.10FindLaw. Freedom Life Insurance Company of America v. Wallant The trial court certified a class of roughly 7,836 Florida policyholders who held certificates issued through the Consumer Independent Association between July 1996 and February 2003.11Florida Supreme Court. Freedom Life v. Wallant, Petitioners Brief on Jurisdiction In December 2004, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal partially upheld certification, allowing common questions about the dispute-resolution clause and statutory compliance to proceed class-wide while reversing certification on a separate injunctive-relief ground. Freedom Life sought review in the Florida Supreme Court in early 2005; the available record does not include a final resolution.
Ward v. National Foundation Life Insurance
A separate class of cancer patients sued National Foundation Life Insurance Company and its affiliate Dixie National Life Insurance Company for breach of contract, alleging the insurers were obligated to pay the actual charges billed by medical providers for cancer treatment rather than the lower amounts negotiated by primary insurers. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a $7.9 million damages award against the companies.12Harpootlian Law. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals $7.9 Million Award in Class Action for Breach of Contract
Illinois Regulatory Action Against Freedom Life
The Illinois Department of Insurance conducted a market conduct examination of Freedom Life covering 2018 and 2019 and found several claim-handling violations. In about 8% of reviewed files, the company failed to pay claims within the required 30-day window. In nearly 5% of files, it failed to pay interest on delayed health claims required by Illinois law. Most strikingly, in roughly 87% of denied claim files, Freedom Life did not inform policyholders they could contact the Illinois Department of Insurance, a violation of state administrative rules. That same notice was missing in about 37% of files where claims were paid at less than the amount requested. The examination ended with a Stipulation and Consent Order, and the department closed the matter on January 29, 2021, after Freedom Life demonstrated it had come into compliance.13Illinois Department of Insurance. Freedom Life Insurance Company of America Market Conduct Examination Report
Consumer Complaints and BBB Actions
The complaint record outside of court tracks closely with the litigation. The Better Business Bureau revoked USHEALTH Advisors’ accreditation in June 2018, citing a “pattern of consumer misunderstanding of coverage benefits,” failures to meet advertising and selling standards, and the discovery that some company agents had posted positive reviews on the BBB platform while posing as customers.14Ideastream. Buyer Beware: Answering Those Health Insurance Spam Calls
On the BBB profile for USHEALTH Group, the company carries an A- rating along with a note that it failed to respond to four complaints.15BBB. USHEALTH Group BBB Profile A separate BBB page for USHEALTH Advisors in Las Vegas shows eight complaints filed between May 2024 and February 2026, all classified as sales and advertising issues, and all listed as unanswered. Complainants describe multiple calls per day from rotating numbers designed to defeat call blocking, and say the company used alternate names such as “Education Advisors” or “Support First” to reach people who had already told them to stop.16BBB. US Health Advisors BBB Complaints
An analysis of Trustpilot reviews found 92% of reviews were negative, with a Net Promoter Score of negative 60. The most common grievances involved agents allegedly misrepresenting coverage as equivalent to traditional major medical insurance or claiming plans were accepted by any UnitedHealthcare provider, unexpected denials for emergency and diagnostic services, and agents who reportedly encouraged applicants to conceal pre-existing conditions.17Kimola. USHEALTH Group Feedback Analysis
How the Company Responds
USHEALTH has said in public statements that its products are lawful, filed with and approved by state insurance departments, and that agents undergo product training and certification before selling. The company has pointed to detailed brochures and a 30-day refund window as safeguards against customer misunderstandings.14Ideastream. Buyer Beware: Answering Those Health Insurance Spam Calls For prospective buyers, the through-line across the lawsuits, the regulatory findings, and the complaint volume is the same: read the policy against the sales pitch, and confirm in writing whether a plan is comprehensive major medical coverage or a fixed indemnity plan that pays only stated dollar amounts.