Is the Fee Schedule Really a Defense in New York No-Fault Cases?

The Fee Schedule Defense: A Flawed Strategy in No-Fault Insurance

No-fault insurance carriers often rely on various defenses to limit their payment obligations to medical providers and injured parties. One particularly controversial strategy involves invoking the “fee schedule” — the regulatory framework that sets maximum allowable rates for medical services under New York No-Fault Insurance Law.

However, as Attorney Jason Tenenbaum explored in a detailed analysis published in the New York Law Journal, this defense strategy creates significant problems when insurance carriers fail to follow proper procedures. The timing of denials and the validity of claim rejections play crucial roles in determining whether carriers can legitimately invoke fee schedule limitations.

Understanding these procedural requirements is essential for both medical providers seeking fair compensation and injured parties navigating the complex world of no-fault insurance claims. The consequences of improper claim handling can be substantial, often requiring carriers to pay amounts that exceed standard fee schedule rates.

What the Fee Schedule Actually Does

New York’s no-fault fee schedule, maintained by the Department of Financial Services, sets the maximum reimbursement rates for medical services provided to individuals injured in motor vehicle accidents. The schedule covers a wide range of services — from chiropractic adjustments to surgical procedures — and assigns specific dollar values to each based on procedure codes.

The policy rationale is straightforward: capped rates control costs, prevent fraud, and keep mandatory insurance premiums manageable. Carriers rely on the fee schedule to reduce their exposure when providers bill at amounts that exceed the schedule maximums.

The fee schedule defense, properly employed, allows a carrier to:

• Pay only the schedule rate rather than the billed amount
• Issue a partial denial for the amount above the schedule maximum
• Avoid liability for charges that exceed regulatory caps

The Timing Problem: When the Defense Falls Apart

Here is the critical vulnerability that Jason Tenenbaum identified in his New York Law Journal article, entitled “Is Fee Schedule Application Really a Defense to a No-Fault Claim?”:

“Perhaps one of the most vexatious and unjust situations in no-fault practice involves the insurance carrier who is compelled to pay a medical provider or injured person an amount for a service or supply that is in excess of the maximum allowable rate under the fee schedule, due to the insurance carrier’s failure to issue a timely or otherwise valid denial.”

Under 11 NYCRR § 65-3.8, carriers must deny claims within 30 days of receiving proof of claim. If an insurer fails to issue a timely denial — or if the denial it does issue is procedurally defective — the insurer may be precluded from asserting the fee schedule limitation as a defense.

The consequence is severe: the carrier may be required to pay the provider’s billed charges in full, even when those charges dramatically exceed what the fee schedule would have permitted. A procedure billed at $5,000 but payable at $800 under the fee schedule could become fully compensable at the billed rate if the denial was untimely.

Why the Fee Schedule Is Not Really a “Defense”

The deeper argument in the New York Law Journal piece concerns the legal characterization of the fee schedule limitation. Tenenbaum argues it is better understood as a measure of damages — something that determines how much a valid claim is worth — rather than an affirmative defense that defeats the claim entirely.

This distinction matters procedurally:

• Affirmative defenses must typically be raised promptly or they are waived
• Measures of damages might be thought to survive even without a timely denial
• But courts have held that failure to timely deny can forfeit even fee schedule arguments, treating the preclusion remedy broadly

When preclusion applies, it sweeps away the carrier’s ability to argue about the amount of the claim, not just its validity. The result: carriers who miss their deadlines often end up paying full billed charges on claims they could have legitimately reduced to fee schedule rates.

Practical Implications for No-Fault Practitioners

For New York no-fault defense practitioners, the lessons are clear:

For carriers and defense counsel:

• Issue denials within 30 days — no exceptions
• Ensure partial denials based on fee schedule are procedurally complete, specifying the fee schedule code and applicable rate
• Do not assume the fee schedule defense survives an untimely denial
• Review denial procedures regularly against current regulatory requirements

For providers and plaintiff’s counsel:

• Scrutinize the timeliness of every denial — an untimely partial denial can open the door to recovery of the full billed amount
• Look at the adequacy of the carrier’s explanation in the denial for fee schedule reductions
• Be aware that current fee schedule rates may have changed since the date of service, and verify applicable rates carefully

For injured parties:

• Understand that procedural failures by carriers can work in your favor when seeking reimbursement
• Treatment providers operating under assignment of benefits carry these rights on your behalf

The no-fault system depends on carriers following established procedures. When they do not, the consequences can far exceed any cost savings the fee schedule was designed to provide.

Legal Update (April 2026): Since this 2010 analysis, New York’s no-fault fee schedules and reimbursement rates have undergone multiple revisions through regulatory amendments and Department of Financial Services updates. The procedural requirements for invoking fee schedule defenses and denial timing provisions discussed in this post may have been modified through subsequent regulation changes. Practitioners should verify current fee schedule rates, procedural requirements, and denial timeframes under the most recent regulatory framework.

Related Articles

• No-Fault attorney
• Fee Schedule Defense Requirements in No-Fault Insurance Cases | Long Island & NYC Legal Analysis
• Fee schedule defense – Appellate Division gives due deference to the DOI