Uninsured Employers' Fund: Penalty

MONTANA SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
Williams Insulation Co. Inc. v. Department of Labor and Industry, Uninsured Employers' Fund, 2003 MT 72 Where Wyoming workers' compensation coverage did not apply to employees working primarily in Montana, UEF properly assessed penalty against employer for failing to carry workers' compensation insurance.
Auto Parts of Bozeman v. Employment Relations Division, Uninsured Employer's Fund, 2001 MT 72. Supreme Court decision. UEF may assess penalty against employer for failing to carry workers' compensation insurance based on insurance company's report that policy was not in effect, without inquiring into employer's allegation that insurer improperly cancelled policy. That dispute must be resolved in district court. WCC reversed.
 
MONTANA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COURT DECISIONS

Dostal v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [12/04/12] 2012 MTWCC 45 Where the Court found that the UEF “failed to enunciate a clear, defensible reason” for denying Petitioner a referral requested by her treating physician, the Court found that the UEF had acted unreasonably and concluded that Petitioner was entitled to a penalty.

Dostal v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [11/15/12] 2012 MTWCC 42 Since the UEF was included in the definition of “insurer” in § 39-71-116(10), MCA (1991), it is therefore treated as such for purposes of § 39-71-2907, MCA, and can be ordered to pay a penalty if this Court determines it unreasonably delays or refuses to pay benefits.
Pekus v. UEF [4/25/03] 2003 MTWCC 33, rev'd in part, 2012 MTWCC 42. The UEF is not an insurer under section 39-71-2907, MCA (2001), and is not subject to a penalty.
Williams Insulation Co. v. DLI/UEF [6/7/02] 2002 MTWCC 33 Employer engaged in construction industry which fails to procure Montana workers' compensation insurance coverage is subject to the statutory penalty provided in section39-71-504(1)(a), MCA (1997). Williams Insulation Co. Inc. v. Department of Labor and Industry, Uninsured Employers' Fund, 2003 MT 72