Please Help - COBRA?

Does anyone have any info on being denied based on having COBRA?  (Of course my insurance co. would never admit to denial based on that reason) but they have all the info they need, aren't giving me adequate reason for their decisions, etc.

I have exhausted my 2nd appeal, and they are making me go by two sets of criteria (I am trying to get a revision approved)  Both the criteria for a revision due to complications with the original surgery (which I have documented proof of) -- AND the criteria for a failed surgery that's not related to "complications from the original surgery"...  is that "okay" for them to do, or does that seem shady to anyone else?

COBRA is exactly the same ins you had as when you had it through your employer.  If it would be approved/denied when you were working for the old company it would be exactly the same with your COBRA.

So it wouldn't be the COBRA, it would be a matter of what they require for approval.  Sadly, they can require anything they want.  It's a contract agreed upon between the original employer and ins co.  They can tell you to bounce up and down on your head 100x daily if they want.

The thing is, they are trying to tell me it's a "repeat revision" --- I haven't even had the first one yet.  They cover revisions if something is wrong with the original surgery (which I have -- staples had came undone, and my pouch had stretched due to severe vomiting.  it has already been determined that it wasn't due to "overeating/binge eating" by a nutritionist, the requesting surgeon, and a psychiatrist.)  

They keep denying it saying that "repeat" revisions are considered investigational.  They're giving me the criteria to go by for "failed wls" (aka: inadequate weightloss the first 2 yrs post op) which isn't my case because I lost 70% of my excess weight in that time.  My doctors said I was "doing well" during those 2 yrs.  The weight gain started when the constant vomiting started, and I had horrible pain for nearly a year -- I then found out I had staples that had came undone.  I am assuming that my insurance company is considering "removing foreign bodies [loose staples and sutures] from the pouch" as a "revision" -- even though it was the surgeon who done the endoscope's responsibility to fix what he saw and stop the pain.  (The staples could've caused infection, inflammation, etc)  Who would've thought that doing the "ethical" thing and treating pain would be considered a revision!

I am not wanting a surgery because I didn't "lose enough weight with my original surgery" -- the problem is, my surgery failed --- not me.  They are treating it as if *I* failed, and since I "lost too much weight in the beginning" it can't be considered "inadequate weightloss"... they are hitting me with a double-edged sword.   (Lost too much weight in the beginning, can't have a revision because "I've already had one that I REALLY didn't have")

I get that Cobra is the exact same thing  -- but they (my insurance company) are NOT going by their "explanation of benefits" -- they are pulling random crap out of nowhere and stalling me along until my Cobra does run out.  (IMO)

Are you limited in the number of appeals you can have?  If so, don't waste the last one.  Get your doc to do a peer to peer review.  That makes all the difference in the world.