Petition Against Insurance Companies: Elderly Stripped of Benefits Due to Covert Filming

The long-term care benefit, intended to provide financial security to the insured in their later years, is at the center of a petition filed with the Supreme Court. It alleges a flawed practice in which the eligibility of the elderly is revoked through covert investigations and isolated recordings that fail to reflect their true medical condition.

At the heart of the petition are the stories of 12 elderly individuals who claim they were previously granted eligibility for long-term care benefits after comprehensive medical examinations, but subsequently lost them following short recordings made outside their homes. According to the petitioners, those few moments were presented as proof that their functional status had improved, even though they do not reflect daily reality.

As reported by Yedioth Ahronoth, the case of 74-year-old Dvora from Sderot illustrates the issue; she struggles with basic activities and requires constant assistance. After receiving a long-term care benefit for about a year, her eligibility was revoked following a recording in which she was seen walking with a cane while waiting for her husband outside a clinic. Her husband noted that the walker she usually uses was left at home because it was cumbersome to transport, yet no one asked for an explanation before the decision was made.

The petition claims this is a widespread phenomenon rather than an exceptional case. It describes instances where elderly people were filmed on their way to medical treatment or during a one-time activity, subsequently receiving a notice of termination of insurance payments. While some managed to regain eligibility after an appeal, others were left without the coverage they had paid for over many years.

The petitioners also raise concerns regarding the manner in which investigations are conducted. They claim that in some cases, deceptive tactics were used, including phone calls from individuals posing as couriers asking to deliver an urgent package, with the goal of causing the insured to leave their home to allow for video surveillance. Lawyers representing the petitioners argue that these methods are inconsistent with established procedures.

The petition is also directed against the Capital Market Authority, which the petitioners claim failed to exercise sufficient oversight despite a multitude of complaints. Conversely, the Authority stated that the petition had not yet been received and that the claims would be clarified within the legal process. The entities operating the long-term care insurance stated they would study the petition upon receipt and respond to the claims during legal proceedings, emphasizing that their activities are carried out in accordance with the law and regulator guidelines.