FastMed

Hello [redacted],
We are looking into this and will contact you directly to resolve the issue of billing and collections. Thank you for your understanding.
 
- Reuel H[redacted]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Just as I had provided Fast Med's collection service [redacted]), I have attached a copy of the receipt given me by Fast Med showing that I paid $30 on the date of service, which was the amount that I was told to pay by the Fast Med front office personnel at the clinic.  I was under the impression that they had reviewed my insurance and this was the full and correct amount they wanted me to pay up front before being seen by the Physician's Assistant.  Additionally, no one in their front office told me that day that there was an additional $10 fee.  Being an urgent care facility, and being that I was very sick at that time, I went there for help, not to help Fast Med balance its books.  By way of reminder, as I've indicated in prior correspondence, Fast Med failed to properly diagnose me or provide me with an appropriate recommendation, because a week after going there I had to be rushed to the ER at which time I found out that I was not suffering from tonsillitis as Fast Med had me believe, but from cancer.  As such, I will also file a complaint with the medical governing board as to the issue of possible malpractice.However, to the issue at hand, as far as I am concerned, I paid in full the amount that I was asked to by Fast Med and assumed that I did so otherwise, as Fast Med's own signage indicates, they would not have seen me on the date of service.  It is clear that Fast Med, from its response to the Revdex.com, considers its paramount interest not to properly treat patients but to have the patients pay for the mistakes of its personnel.  Had I not paid what was considered on the date of service the appropriate co-payment by Fast Med, I would not have been seen that day.  That they charged me $30 and not $40 on the date of service is the responsibility of their front office on the date of service.  That they failed to do so on the date of service is their issue, not mine.  From Fast Med's response to the Revdex.com, it is also quite clear that they do not believe in the standard of good business practice, which is the customer is always right.  In other words, they should accept the fact that their very own workers failed them that day, with a mere loss of $10, and move forward.  Instead, they sent bills to my home during the time I was critically ill as a hospital inpatient for this $10 that they failed to bill me on the date of service.  Therefore, I find that their business practice is inefficient and their customer relations poor.  Moreover, all subsequent collection costs due to their billing error is something I should not pay.  I am certain that Fast Med, its personnel, and their proxy, [redacted], have spent far more than $10 in their efforts to retrospectively correct their error by [redacted]ing me for the $10 and the additional $18 in so-called costs.Therefore, as I have shown above, I should not pay the additional $10 nor the $18 to cover their collection efforts, as this whole affair is due to Fast Med's error on the date of service, not mine.  My expectations going to an urgent care facility such as Fast Med is that their personnel is professionally trained and when a co-payment amount is asked at the time of service and is paid in full on that date, that is the end of the story.  Any bookkeeping errors in retrospect should be their responsibility and not shunted off to patients.  That this is the apparent stance of Fast Med shows what kind of business this is, as I am sure that the loss of my $10 would not set them on the road to bankruptcy.  I acted in good faith on the date of service.  That they continue to not admit that they are in the wrong and behave as though I acted in bad faith on the date of service, really says a lot about them as a company.I would not recommend anyone I know to go to Fast Med given my experience.  If Fast Med were a gracious business practitioner, it would have understood its personnel committed an error of $10 and "ate" the cost, not to instead place the blame on its client/patient.  Therefore, I will neither pay the additional $10 nor the $18 in added fees.I request that the Revdex.com forward a copy of my file on to the appropriate state governing board to complement my complaint regarding my situation as a possible malpractice case involving Fast Med.

Regards,

[redacted] was billed for services rendered but we were notified by patient on June 5, 2014 that this was to be billed as a workers compensation visit. Our representative received the claim number from patient but did not receive any insurance information. On September 16, 2014 [redacted]...

insurance contacted us and provided all the information needed in order to bill them for the claim. Our representative billed [redacted] at that time. On October 29, 2014 I  corrected the [redacted] invoice creating a credit for them of $124.15 and a credit for patient of $25 which was paid at the time of service.I have requested an expedited refund of $25 to be mailed to patients address. I also made the city correction on his account from Denver, Co to Lakewood, CO. We will be refunding [redacted] the payment they made and we are now just waiting on CNA insurance to process the workers compensation claim.[redacted] Billing Group Lead – AZ

We are attempting to contact the patient and work out the issue with...

them.  We have responded to them on a number of occasions and it is clear to me that they do not understand the insurance process despite our best efforts to explain it to them.  We have removed the claim from collections.

 

Here is the statement from our billing office manager:

 

I do not think we did anything wrong but just the language used when patients have dual insurance coverage, it can be confusing when they are told they will not have to pay anything. (co-pays, co-insurance and deductibles are still involved.)

This patient has dual coverage and did not pay the co-pay up front, which is normal with dual insurances.  I believe it is how the front desk states that the patient will not have a co-pay because they do have 2 insurances.  According to the patient they tried to pay at least 3 occasions and they feel  they were falsely informed by our staff.

The patient was taken out of collections and just charged the co-pay amount per conversation with patient… in resulting in probably another miscommunication.

 

Medical insurance billing is very complicated even for the most seasoned professional.  We have tried to work with this patient in good faith and will continue to do so.

 

Dr [redacted]

[redacted]...

[redacted]

I have not heard anything else from them. I spoke to several people there and went through their proper channels but they did not leave me satisfied and have heard nothing else.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's...

response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.

Regards,

Issue has been resolved

Per review by the Regional Chief Medical Officer, this patient was appropriately evaluated and professional advice was given based on that evaluation.

Complaint has been resolved

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

I confirm that I received a check from FastMed that refunds the $25.00 co-payment I made in April 2014. I am truly offended, however, by FastMed's statement, here and in the letter of "apology" they sent: "Our representative received the claim number from patient but did not receive any insurance information." Blaming me for not providing "insurance information" is offensive on its face, plus it is a LIE. I scanned everything I sent to FastMed, and so I know that on July 08, 2014, I sent them a copy of the letter from [redacted]. On [redacted]'s LETTERHEAD, this contained the claim number, the policyholder's name, the name of the underwriting company, other relevant dates and information, and the name, signature, address, phone number, fax number, and email address of a claims technician. What other "insurance information" could I possibly have provided?! Besides, from the time I called on June 04, to when I contacted them in writing on July 08, to September 16 when [redacted] starting calling them directly, until after I filed this complaint with the Revdex.com on October 27—why in all that time could FastMed NOT have picked up the phone or written back to me in a way that acknowledged me or that responded constructively? Only when the Revdex.com held their feet to the fire did they even begin to show awareness of the mental anguish they were causing; without Revdex.com involvement, I doubt they would have acted yet. It also remains to be seen if FastMed "creating a credit" for my insurer makes [redacted] of Arizona whole. So thank you, Revdex.com. But this is a lousy company that undermines the perception of businesses in your city, and I think you should have the [redacted] do some more digging into their activities.

Regards,[redacted]

Hello [redacted], thank you for letting us know about your billing issue.  Billing can be complicated so we would really like to understand the details.  Please contact me at [redacted].[redacted]at your earliest convenience.  Thanks again.[redacted],...

MBAChief Compliance Officer, Privacy OfficerRegional President, NCFastMed Urgent Care

the patients co-pay for urgent care was $40  (stated on insurance card) – not certain why only $30 was collected.  Patients explanation of benefits from his...

insurance company should clearly state what his co-pay was at time of service.  We went through the proper process of sending multiple statements to which we had no response and now his account is in collections for a total of $28.00.

I received a message from the business that a refund check for the original amount would be issued in 2 weeks. I have heard this from them before.  I will not consider this claim resolved until I am in possession of my refund with interest.  It has been...

nearly six months.  If I had been a client of theirs and owed a bill, it would have been reported to collections. So, advising me again then a check would be sent in two weeks is not an acceptable resolution.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

I thought I had a resolution but they sent me another invoice three days after speaking with them. I spoke to a lady two days ago that said she will correct the invoice and I should no longer have a balance. I hope this solves the problem.

s far as response to Mr. [redacted]’s second letter we have no additional information to provide.  He agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions set for by his insurance company.  These are their rules not ours.  In fact, it is the standard in the industry all across the country.  Our contract with his insurance company specifies that we make every effort to collect monies due from the patient.  In some cases, it is illegal to not collect copays in full.  Mr. [redacted] admits that he received multiple bills from us yet made no attempt to contact us regarding the bills.  Each round of bills costs our company time and resources.  Yet, as I mentioned before, we are contractually obligated to pursue these amounts.
 
He states that we made an error in our billing yet no error exists.  Out billing is 100% consistent with the EOB (explanation of Benefits) that he received from his insurance company.
 
We process nearly 500,000 claims each year and there is absolutely nothing unique about this claim.  The money we collect at the front desk for a patient is a “best guess” based on information we have at the time.    Until the claim is adjudicated through the claim submission and payment process we  don’t really know what a patient’s portion of the claim will be.  I would be the first one to sign up for real-time claim adjudication such as exists in the pharmacy business but in the medical world is simply does not exist. 
 
As far as concerns that he expresses regarding the care he received in our facility I cannot comment other than to say we stand behind the care that was rendered. 
 
We wish the patient all the best.  However, we will not be withdrawing his account from collections.
 
Sincerely,
Dr [redacted]

Review: Fast Med Urgent Care has added a fraudulent charge and subsequent late fees which has now gone to collection; full payment was made on date of serv

Was seen by doctor at Fast Med Urgent Care location in Tucson, Arizona in December 2012. The insurance required a co-payment of $30 which was paid at the time of service. I later received a bill for $10 and then a total of $18 was added as "late fees". There was never any explanation for the $10 bill especially given that at the time of service there was no indication or discussion of any additional charges. This is a bogus charge as are all of the so-called late fees. In addition, the diagnosis I received could be construed as malpractice in that I actually was suffering from lymphoma and not tonsillitis as was diagnosed at Fast Med. I may need to make an additional complaint regarding this fact. Within two weeks following my visit at Fast Med, I was admitted to the hospital and had to stay there for the next 5 months for treatment of advanced lymphoma.Desired Settlement: These charges are fraudulent and should be expunged.

Business

Response:

the patients co-pay for urgent care was $40 (stated on insurance card) – not certain why only $30 was collected. Patients explanation of benefits from his insurance company should clearly state what his co-pay was at time of service. We went through the proper process of sending multiple statements to which we had no response and now his account is in collections for a total of $28.00.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Just as I had provided Fast Med's collection service [redacted]), I have attached a copy of the receipt given me by Fast Med showing that I paid $30 on the date of service, which was the amount that I was told to pay by the Fast Med front office personnel at the clinic. I was under the impression that they had reviewed my insurance and this was the full and correct amount they wanted me to pay up front before being seen by the Physician's Assistant. Additionally, no one in their front office told me that day that there was an additional $10 fee. Being an urgent care facility, and being that I was very sick at that time, I went there for help, not to help Fast Med balance its books. By way of reminder, as I've indicated in prior correspondence, Fast Med failed to properly diagnose me or provide me with an appropriate recommendation, because a week after going there I had to be rushed to the ER at which time I found out that I was not suffering from tonsillitis as Fast Med had me believe, but from cancer. As such, I will also file a complaint with the medical governing board as to the issue of possible malpractice.However, to the issue at hand, as far as I am concerned, I paid in full the amount that I was asked to by Fast Med and assumed that I did so otherwise, as Fast Med's own signage indicates, they would not have seen me on the date of service. It is clear that Fast Med, from its response to the Revdex.com, considers its paramount interest not to properly treat patients but to have the patients pay for the mistakes of its personnel. Had I not paid what was considered on the date of service the appropriate co-payment by Fast Med, I would not have been seen that day. That they charged me $30 and not $40 on the date of service is the responsibility of their front office on the date of service. That they failed to do so on the date of service is their issue, not mine. From Fast Med's response to the Revdex.com, it is also quite clear that they do not believe in the standard of good business practice, which is the customer is always right. In other words, they should accept the fact that their very own workers failed them that day, with a mere loss of $10, and move forward. Instead, they sent bills to my home during the time I was critically ill as a hospital inpatient for this $10 that they failed to bill me on the date of service. Therefore, I find that their business practice is inefficient and their customer relations poor. Moreover, all subsequent collection costs due to their billing error is something I should not pay. I am certain that Fast Med, its personnel, and their proxy, [redacted], have spent far more than $10 in their efforts to retrospectively correct their error by [redacted]ing me for the $10 and the additional $18 in so-called costs.Therefore, as I have shown above, I should not pay the additional $10 nor the $18 to cover their collection efforts, as this whole affair is due to Fast Med's error on the date of service, not mine. My expectations going to an urgent care facility such as Fast Med is that their personnel is professionally trained and when a co-payment amount is asked at the time of service and is paid in full on that date, that is the end of the story. Any bookkeeping errors in retrospect should be their responsibility and not shunted off to patients. That this is the apparent stance of Fast Med shows what kind of business this is, as I am sure that the loss of my $10 would not set them on the road to bankruptcy. I acted in good faith on the date of service. That they continue to not admit that they are in the wrong and behave as though I acted in bad faith on the date of service, really says a lot about them as a company.I would not recommend anyone I know to go to Fast Med given my experience. If Fast Med were a gracious business practitioner, it would have understood its personnel committed an error of $10 and "ate" the cost, not to instead place the blame on its client/patient. Therefore, I will neither pay the additional $10 nor the $18 in added fees.I request that the Revdex.com forward a copy of my file on to the appropriate state governing board to complement my complaint regarding my situation as a possible malpractice case involving Fast Med.

Regards,

Business

Response:

s far as response to Mr. [redacted]’s second letter we have no additional information to provide. He agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions set for by his insurance company. These are their rules not ours. In fact, it is the standard in the industry all across the country. Our contract with his insurance company specifies that we make every effort to collect monies due from the patient. In some cases, it is illegal to not collect copays in full. Mr. [redacted] admits that he received multiple bills from us yet made no attempt to contact us regarding the bills. Each round of bills costs our company time and resources. Yet, as I mentioned before, we are contractually obligated to pursue these amounts. He states that we made an error in our billing yet no error exists. Out billing is 100% consistent with the EOB (explanation of Benefits) that he received from his insurance company. We process nearly 500,000 claims each year and there is absolutely nothing unique about this claim. The money we collect at the front desk for a patient is a “best guess” based on information we have at the time. Until the claim is adjudicated through the claim submission and payment process we don’t really know what a patient’s portion of the claim will be. I would be the first one to sign up for real-time claim adjudication such as exists in the pharmacy business but in the medical world is simply does not exist. As far as concerns that he expresses regarding the care he received in our facility I cannot comment other than to say we stand behind the care that was rendered. We wish the patient all the best. However, we will not be withdrawing his account from collections. Sincerely,Dr [redacted]

Visited FastMed in Winston Salem, NC on 1/26/16. Was told I needed to pay $125 at that time because I had a high deductible insurance plan. I paid this and was given a piece of paper that states "In the event today's estimated responsibility is higher than your final patient responsibility, FastMed will issue a refund check within 30 days". When reviewing my insurance claims online this week, I noticed that my insurance actually paid 100% of the bill and my patient responsibility was $0. It has been 84 days since that visit and still no refund. I have called FastMed twice and been directed to voicemail because "all representatives are busy but leave a voicemail and we will return your call in 1 business day". It has been multiple business days and no call back. Very frustrated with this company.

Review: I was seen on June 28, 2015 for a simple upper respiratory infection and I paid a $50 copay to Fastmed at the time of service. After a few weeks I receive an email stating how I owe $100 or so after them trying to bill my insurance. But I was apparently misled into thinking I my insurance was accepted by them. It's clearly stated on their website. They also claim my insurance company contacted me but they have not done so.Desired Settlement: To either clear the charges and try to refile my insurance company or only charge me $50 since I already paid them $50.

Business

Response:

Hello [redacted], thank you for letting us know about your billing issue. Billing can be complicated so we would really like to understand the details. Please contact me at [redacted].[redacted]at your earliest convenience. Thanks again.[redacted], MBAChief Compliance Officer, Privacy OfficerRegional President, NCFastMed Urgent Care

Review: I was injured in a fall on April 03, 2014, while traveling on business. I was seen at the FastMed facility on Ray Road and sent on my way. They charged me a co-pay and then billed my insurance company, but within two weeks, the incident was found to be covered as a worker's comp claim and it was assigned to [redacted]. FastMed refuses to acknowledge or act upon this new information, however, and I continue to receive monthly demands for payment of excess charges, even though they actually owe me a refund of the $25.00 copayment. I have called and left messages; I have informed them in writing; [redacted] has made multiple attempts to get them to correct their billing, but to no avail. The company engages in no communication that does not serve their interests. They are either totally incompetent, or maybe they are trying to pull a fast one and double bill for services. All their transactions probably should be audited.Desired Settlement: I need the entire billing corrected, and I need my $25.00 refunded, and I need a written apology this week, or else I will continue with further complaints and will consider legal action for harassment and other charges relating to interstate collections fraud.

Business

Response:

[redacted] was billed for services rendered but we were notified by patient on June 5, 2014 that this was to be billed as a workers compensation visit. Our representative received the claim number from patient but did not receive any insurance information. On September 16, 2014 [redacted] insurance contacted us and provided all the information needed in order to bill them for the claim. Our representative billed [redacted] at that time. On October 29, 2014 I corrected the [redacted] invoice creating a credit for them of $124.15 and a credit for patient of $25 which was paid at the time of service.I have requested an expedited refund of $25 to be mailed to patients address. I also made the city correction on his account from Denver, Co to Lakewood, CO. We will be refunding [redacted] the payment they made and we are now just waiting on CNA insurance to process the workers compensation claim.[redacted] Billing Group Lead – AZ

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

I confirm that I received a check from FastMed that refunds the $25.00 co-payment I made in April 2014. I am truly offended, however, by FastMed's statement, here and in the letter of "apology" they sent: "Our representative received the claim number from patient but did not receive any insurance information." Blaming me for not providing "insurance information" is offensive on its face, plus it is a LIE. I scanned everything I sent to FastMed, and so I know that on July 08, 2014, I sent them a copy of the letter from [redacted]. On [redacted]'s LETTERHEAD, this contained the claim number, the policyholder's name, the name of the underwriting company, other relevant dates and information, and the name, signature, address, phone number, fax number, and email address of a claims technician. What other "insurance information" could I possibly have provided?! Besides, from the time I called on June 04, to when I contacted them in writing on July 08, to September 16 when [redacted] starting calling them directly, until after I filed this complaint with the Revdex.com on October 27—why in all that time could FastMed NOT have picked up the phone or written back to me in a way that acknowledged me or that responded constructively? Only when the Revdex.com held their feet to the fire did they even begin to show awareness of the mental anguish they were causing; without Revdex.com involvement, I doubt they would have acted yet. It also remains to be seen if FastMed "creating a credit" for my insurer makes [redacted] of Arizona whole. So thank you, Revdex.com. But this is a lousy company that undermines the perception of businesses in your city, and I think you should have the [redacted] do some more digging into their activities.

Regards,

Review: I used the FastMed Urgent care center and informed them that I was dual covered with health insurance. I was informed by the office staff that I did not owe the $50.00 co-pay; although I offered to pay, they declined. I then received an invoice. I called and they stated they would resubmit the bill. I again called and offered to pay; however, they refused payment and insisted that they would resubmit the invoice to the insurance by using a "different code". FastMed sent my account to collections where I was threatened to pay the now $70.00 bill or they would submit it to my credit report. I paid the collections in protest because I was falsely informed by the staff - not only did they falsely inform me they refused payment on at least three different occasions. This is very poor business and I will never use their facility for any reason ever again. I will also be sure to let everyone that I know not to use their facility.Desired Settlement: I believe that I am entitled to a full refund as I was falsely informed by the staff members and the fact that they refused my to accept payment from me on three different occasions, only to send me to collections with an additional fee.

Business

Response:

We are attempting to contact the patient and work out the issue with them. We have responded to them on a number of occasions and it is clear to me that they do not understand the insurance process despite our best efforts to explain it to them. We have removed the claim from collections.

Here is the statement from our billing office manager:

I do not think we did anything wrong but just the language used when patients have dual insurance coverage, it can be confusing when they are told they will not have to pay anything. (co-pays, co-insurance and deductibles are still involved.)

This patient has dual coverage and did not pay the co-pay up front, which is normal with dual insurances. I believe it is how the front desk states that the patient will not have a co-pay because they do have 2 insurances. According to the patient they tried to pay at least 3 occasions and they feel they were falsely informed by our staff.

The patient was taken out of collections and just charged the co-pay amount per conversation with patient… in resulting in probably another miscommunication.

Medical insurance billing is very complicated even for the most seasoned professional. We have tried to work with this patient in good faith and will continue to do so.

Dr [redacted]

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

I thought I had a resolution but they sent me another invoice three days after speaking with them. I spoke to a lady two days ago that said she will correct the invoice and I should no longer have a balance. I hope this solves the problem.