decision where now defying you in provider you have a different view of it why don't you do something within one hundred eighty days of receipt of doubt letter day time period because it's not work harder under the real plan or the of god i'm not i'm not telling you i read it differently and i look at the secretary of labor regulation which describes an adverse be hartford in june of two thousand and twelve then send notice and said your benefits are going to be terminated in fifteen months sorry for did not provide an opportunity to an appeal and they reversed that decision no that was after the decision had been reversed daughter started first and notice in september of two thousand and eleven stating it would terminate benefits in november of two thousand and eleven i notice had not been timely provided less than two weeks later hartford sends out another letter june fourth two thousand and twelve and says the benefits will be determined terminated on september twelfth two thousand and thirt since something similar happens on july seventeenth prior you to submit any information you have to showing that this is a cognitive disorder and not a mental health issue because if it's subject to their mental health say you are subject to a twenty four month limitation  benefit request was that you would be free of having to make any such showings because since there was a cognitive disorder none of those stories would be necessary i thought but hard for tempting more and that's why it was a denial at that point it's you know  and twelve a better doctor forty eight but say she appealed even though there was no you're right in the latter she appeals that far from a sense decision in forty five days it's done quickly she file suit because she's going to say i'm still entitle came to us even though you were seeing benefits for longer than that you'd be and it doesn't make any sense for a court to be resolving it until benefits are actually terminated correct is there any case that says that because it's an odd way for the  have problems it's hard to predict in the habit of not explaining to people why they have won and right that it is that they have to accept and and that they have you think may change our mind we're willing to accept and she did and said met some further information to you you do not find back to it changes your there's a set of arguments one can show for the this model of mental illness for purposes of the mental illness provision yes that's one type of argument if that's the case then you just don't look at the mental illness provision of its caps or rules when the letters go back out say do you have any other information with that information about whether you are confined to the hospital at a place by such provide medical care for the disabled condition was that whereas those others condition to hospital patients that may have occurred during the payment of your client that relates it seems to me not to the threshold question but to the second part clearly there couldn't be identical language of the second part of the definition and bothers me is with what happens in these situations where the plaintiff is the insured is saying i'm not subject to the mental health i'm a patient the insurer says that you are and then the insurer is just responding by saying give me all right you're in the merits of it now but you've got to convince us the notice of one hundred eighty days in your failure to comply with it can be excused