Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 16, 2015/09/03) */ (Revdex.com - converted from original documentSee file.) Consumer Protection Section East Broad Street 14th Floor Columbus, OH September 1, Mark *O [redacted] , DMD Sterkel Blvd Suite Mansfield, OH Re: [redacted] Complaint [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam; In response to your letter, this is our explanation 1I have enclosed copies of all communication in regard to the [redacted] account The issue started with the submission of the dental claim for [redacted] for DOS 2/9/When it was initially sent the [redacted] the software ( [redacted] ) pulling the incorrect fees for Dr O [redacted] When we received payment from [redacted] we found the problem and decided we would write off the amount due as a professional courtesy instead of billing the patients accountIt zeroed out the account and as far as we were concerned the matter was closed to the patients good [redacted] called the office after reviewing her EOB from the insurance company and thought that we had overcharged the accountI "tried" to explain to her what had occurred and that we had written off the $since it was a mistake on our behalfShe still felt we had "overcharged" the account then told her that I would write a letter to [redacted] and resubmit the claim with the corrected fees (copy enclosed)This meant that I had to add in the amount we had written off in their behalf-$ [redacted] did reconsider the claim with the corrected fees and only paid an additional $This was applied to the account and now it meant that there was an amount due of $ I have tried on multiple times to get Mrs [redacted] to come in so that I could explain and show her in detail all the information, but she has never come in to do so It is our desire to work with all of patients to make everything very clear to them where their insurance and accounts are concernedWe give all patients an "estimate only" of what their co-pays will beThat is our office policy We certainly want to clear the matter to the good for all parties involved and would be glad to sit down with the [redacted] to help them understand that once they requested the claim be resubmitted there was a good possibility of more co-pay due on their accountAlso, [redacted] has a very low UCR for this procedure which is another reason for the co-pay If you would like to speak with me on this matter, you may contact me at the number above Sincerely, Deborah M [redacted] Office Manager cc: Revdex.com Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 18, 2015/09/05) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) First of all, she was not the one that contacted [redacted] -I DID! The first time I called her was to ask if the difference with what we owed and the amount that my husband paid on the day of service was because it was out-of-networkDuring the conversation, she made a comment "Just be glad we don't bill you for the $91.80." But I can see that she didn't include that in her statementA few days later, I received a bill for $I will say it again: the call was not about thatI was the one that contacted [redacted] because the total was $1,on the day of service, but only $1,was submittedI don't buy the candy-coated letter because it is backwardsYes, she has asked several times for me to come to the office to talkAnd like I told her several times on the phone, it is hard to do with my work scheduleI don't work a job for 2-days a weekI work (scheduled) days a week- 10-hours (scheduled) a dayAnd it is senseless to use my personal or vacation time for this matterIt is really ironic that they tried to do the same thing to me when I went to them for a root canalThey sent me a bill, I called and Deb M [redacted] said I owed itA short time later, a letter came in the mail that she screwed up because of new software! And the bill was a lot less! So, after all this time, is the excuse the software again?
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 16, 2015/09/03) */ (Revdex.com - converted from original documentSee file.) Consumer Protection Section East Broad Street 14th Floor Columbus, OH September 1, Mark *O [redacted] , DMD Sterkel Blvd Suite Mansfield, OH Re: [redacted] Complaint [redacted] Dear Sir/Madam; In response to your letter, this is our explanation 1I have enclosed copies of all communication in regard to the [redacted] account The issue started with the submission of the dental claim for [redacted] for DOS 2/9/When it was initially sent the [redacted] the software ( [redacted] ) pulling the incorrect fees for Dr O [redacted] When we received payment from [redacted] we found the problem and decided we would write off the amount due as a professional courtesy instead of billing the patients accountIt zeroed out the account and as far as we were concerned the matter was closed to the patients good [redacted] called the office after reviewing her EOB from the insurance company and thought that we had overcharged the accountI "tried" to explain to her what had occurred and that we had written off the $since it was a mistake on our behalfShe still felt we had "overcharged" the account then told her that I would write a letter to [redacted] and resubmit the claim with the corrected fees (copy enclosed)This meant that I had to add in the amount we had written off in their behalf-$ [redacted] did reconsider the claim with the corrected fees and only paid an additional $This was applied to the account and now it meant that there was an amount due of $ I have tried on multiple times to get Mrs [redacted] to come in so that I could explain and show her in detail all the information, but she has never come in to do so It is our desire to work with all of patients to make everything very clear to them where their insurance and accounts are concernedWe give all patients an "estimate only" of what their co-pays will beThat is our office policy We certainly want to clear the matter to the good for all parties involved and would be glad to sit down with the [redacted] to help them understand that once they requested the claim be resubmitted there was a good possibility of more co-pay due on their accountAlso, [redacted] has a very low UCR for this procedure which is another reason for the co-pay If you would like to speak with me on this matter, you may contact me at the number above Sincerely, Deborah M [redacted] Office Manager cc: Revdex.com Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 18, 2015/09/05) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) First of all, she was not the one that contacted [redacted] -I DID! The first time I called her was to ask if the difference with what we owed and the amount that my husband paid on the day of service was because it was out-of-networkDuring the conversation, she made a comment "Just be glad we don't bill you for the $91.80." But I can see that she didn't include that in her statementA few days later, I received a bill for $I will say it again: the call was not about thatI was the one that contacted [redacted] because the total was $1,on the day of service, but only $1,was submittedI don't buy the candy-coated letter because it is backwardsYes, she has asked several times for me to come to the office to talkAnd like I told her several times on the phone, it is hard to do with my work scheduleI don't work a job for 2-days a weekI work (scheduled) days a week- 10-hours (scheduled) a dayAnd it is senseless to use my personal or vacation time for this matterIt is really ironic that they tried to do the same thing to me when I went to them for a root canalThey sent me a bill, I called and Deb M [redacted] said I owed itA short time later, a letter came in the mail that she screwed up because of new software! And the bill was a lot less! So, after all this time, is the excuse the software again?