Diversified Radiology Of Colorado, P.C.

In response to a billing/collection issue filed with the Revdex.com on December 27, by [redacted] against Diversified Radiology of ColoradoAfter reviewing the accounts for Ms [redacted] it has been determined that a refund in the amount of $should not be issued as it was these actions that prompted final resolutionThe services for this account were rendered in December with statements being issued on 12/30/14, 1/27/2015, 2/25/2015, and 3/25/During this time we never received any returned mail or notification of an invalid/incorrect address Since there was no response received from these efforts, the account was placed with our outside collection agency in April According to our outside collection agency’s records, a new address was found for Ms [redacted] on 9/29/and validation notices were sent by Professional Finance Company to the new address After receiving no response from these notices, the account was escalated for legal actionThe service (of summons) was held until on or about 12/20/17, to allow the debtor time to respond, when she did not, the process server was dispatched and served at the current address discovered on 9/29/ Upon our review we recognize that there was an error on the address originally, this was corrected and the debtor was provided almost months to respond to notices prior to being served a court summonsHad a response been received prior to the court summon being served, we would have had much more interest in settling any interest or associated court fees but it was this action that prompted contact and final resolution of this situation

In response to a billing/collection issue filed with the Revdex.com on November 14, by *** *** against Diversified Radiology of ColoradoAfter reviewing the accounts for *** ***, it has been determined that the CT services provided in are not the exact same
services provided in 2017. The difference in pricing is a result of the different procedures that were performed, and the allowed amounts approved by *** ***’s insurance carrier. The balance of $is the contractual amounts approved by *** ***’s insurance which was applied to her deductible. Per our payer agreement we can not discount a charge below the contractual amounts unless there is an extreme financial hardship in which case a written request will need to be sent to our office along with all supporting documentation. See attached explanation of benefits from *** ***’s insurance carrierDiversified Radiology of Colorado, P.Cworks hard to provide quality healthcare and ensure we operate in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations as well as procedure standardsI apologize that this situation has escalated to this point and I hope you find this matter resolved

In response to a billing/collection issue filed with the Revdex.com on December 27, 2017 by [redacted] against Diversified Radiology of Colorado. After reviewing the accounts for Ms. [redacted] it has been determined that a refund in the amount of $113.45 should not be issued as it was...

these actions that prompted final resolution. The services for this account were rendered in December 2014 with statements being issued on 12/30/14, 1/27/2015, 2/25/2015, and 3/25/2015. During this time we never received any returned mail or notification of an invalid/incorrect address.  Since there was no response received from these efforts, the account was placed with our outside collection agency in April 2015.  According to our outside collection agency’s records, a new address was found for Ms. [redacted] on 9/29/2017 and validation notices were sent by Professional Finance Company to the new address.  After receiving no response from these notices, the account was escalated for legal action. The service (of summons) was held until on or about 12/20/17, to allow the debtor time to respond, when she did not, the process server was dispatched and served at the current address discovered on 9/29/17.  Upon our review we recognize that there was an error on the address originally, this was corrected and the debtor was provided almost 3 months to respond to notices prior to being served a court summons. Had a response been received prior to the court summon being served, we would have had much more interest in settling any interest or associated court fees but it was this action that prompted contact and final resolution of this situation.