Kurt Christianson D D S

Review: I went in for a routine cleaning on July 2, 2014. They strongly pushed on me a "deep" cleaning. When I say "strongly", I mean they were going to have me sign a waiver stating that I had refused it if I didn't get it. This clever scare tactic worked. They checked with my insurance company (so they claimed), and told me that my insurance would cover a "deep cleaning" once every two years and that my out of pocket would be $34.40, which I agreed to since they had (so they claimed) checked with my insurance company. They informed me during the procedure that they needed more time and I would have to come back to complete it. They did not inform me that this would cost me additional money out of pocket. At part two of the procedure on July 15, 2014, they informed me the procedure that they had previously told me would be out of pocket $34.40 now required an additional $64 out of pocket. The 286% increase in out of pocket seemed like extortion to me, but I was there, had already done half the procedure, and I wanted to get it over with, so I went through with it and paid the additional $64 out of pocket above what they had told me it would cost.

Then another bill came. They want me to pay an additional $148.40, total $246.80 out of pocket - a 717% increase over the originally stated amount - for teeth cleaning! I contacted the dental office and was told the insurance company had told them they would cover the cleaning at 90%, but then paid only 60% and I would have to contact the insurance company. They were not willing to work out their own communication problem. All they cared about now was extorting another $148.40 from me. I could not believe the anti-customer attitude after using them for 4 years, but I called the insurance company - who verified that the procedure they billed for was in the system at 60% and had been since January 1. The dental office could not have verified the payout with the insurance company as they claimed. The dental office had either made an assumption based on old data - or lied to me. The next call back to the dentist office degraded quickly with more anti-customer behavior and a complete unwillingness of them to contact the insurance company to resolve an error that the dental office was clearly the owner of. I was told that the doctor was aware of the situation and this was his final decision. On top of this, I received a call from a collection company only 10 days after receiving the bill - something a legitimate business would never do so quickly.

I believe they are pushing (and I do mean PUSHING) extra unnecessary procedures on patients in an effort to scam the insurance companies. In this case their scam failed and they expect me to pay. They already lied to me and extorted an additional $64. I will not be duped again into paying another $148.40. Please investigate this dentist.Desired Settlement: Primarily this second attempt at extortion for $148.40 needs to be vacated. It would be great to also be reimbursed for the first extortion of $64, but I will call this settled if I can at least get the current charges vacated.

Business

Response:

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2014/09/02) */

Our office diligently protects our patient's protected health information as required by Federal law, which includes the patient's name and address. Therefore, I cannot confirm whether or not the person making this complaint is a patient of mine, nor can I comment on any complaint without violating the law.

The Federal Government provides strict guidelines on protected health information. Before I could discuss anything with a third party I would need the patient to fill out and sign a HIPAA release form and specifically allow the Revdex.com and all of its employees to view any records or be privy to any discussion regarding the patient's health care. In addition, the Federal Government requires the Revdex.com to also sign a HIPAA form with our office wherein the Revdex.com agrees to follow HIPAA guidelines and rules regarding protection of the patient's health care information. Finally, if it is the Revdex.com's intention to publish electronically or print any part of the complaint and my response, the law requires the release from the Patient to also allow publication of his complaint for the viewing of the general public as well as the Revdex.com's specific intent to publish my reply to the general public.

My general recommendations for any complaint would be to allow the State Board of Dentistry to review any complaint, and if it involved insurance, to let the State's Insurance Commission review the complaint first.

You can find out more by visiting the information on the government's website: www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/

Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 11, 2014/09/08) */

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)

HIPAA form has been filed and accepted by the Revdex.com.