St Luke's Hospital

(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I have not seen the receipt that St. Luke's Hospital said they were going to send. I expect it to be the same as the one I have because of their response to Revdex.com is the same as I received from their Billing Department.
This being the case, I still argue that St. Luke's is charging me the difference between the $28.80 provided by [redacted] Health Insurance and the $183.80 charged by St. Luke's on December 3, 2013 or a charge to me of $155.00. On my paper bill from St. Luke's, this $155 is shown as a real number under Unit Price column and carried to the Total Charge column. The $155.00 is not shown anywhere as a credit on my bill which would indicate that I was not charged as St. Luke's is claiming.
[redacted] Health told me that the St. Luke service that cost $183.80 had been negotiated by [redacted] to cost only $28.80. This is why they paid $28.80 and rejected the $155.00. For this reason, [redacted] claims that the balance of $155.00 should not be charged to me.
I don't intend to pay the $155.00 charge which is part of the balance of $297.60 shown on my St. Luke's bill. Instead, I will pay $297.60 less $155.00 or a balance of $142.60 because St. Luke's Hospital has not shown me on my bill that I was not charged $155.00.
I have been to St. Luke's Hospital on more than one occasion. I wrote a letter to the CEO of St. Luke's Hospital about the poor sign directions on finding the room or even the parking lot that a visitor or patient is looking for. I also indicated in that same letter that there were an inadequate number of hand sanitizer dispensers in the cafeteria. The CEO never responded to my letter. In general, St. Luke's Hospital is not very customer sensitive. The failure of St. Luke's hospital of not showing me their claim that I was not being charged $155.00 is another example of poor customer service.
It is so important to St. Luke's Hospital Administration to show that they are right and I am wrong they hired a collection agency to collect the balance of $297.60. Rather than inviting me to meet with them in an environment of openness and transparency, they chose to spend/will spend money - probably more than $155.00 to force collection from me. As I said above, I will pay no more than $142.60.
I intend never to go to St. Luke's Hospital again because of their lack of customer service. Whenever I discuss hospitals with relatives, friends or acquaintances, I will recommend that they not go to St. Luke's Hospital. As long as St. Luke's Hospital Administration has an attitude of superiority, they will continue to have poor customer service.

Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: [redacted]
Contact Email: [redacted]@stlukes-stl.com
I have reveiwed this patient's account and found that he had services that span from 11/14/13 - 12/3/13. His insurance changed from [redacted] to [redacted] on 12/1/13. The November...

charges were billed to [redacted] who paid $48.84 and applied $297.60 as his copay. The December charges were billed to [redacted] who paid $28.28 with no patient responsibility. The patient has not made any payments on his account so his balance in the amount of $297.60 remains due. We will send him another itemized statemnet per his request.

It appears they did exactly as requested.   I appreciate your help and St Luke’s for doing the right thing.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/27) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Assoc Dir.
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@stlukes-stl.com
I have reviewed you accounts and found that account XXXXXXXXXX was paid in full by insurance on 8/12/15 and an itemized...

statement showing a $0 balance was mailed to you on 9/29/15 per your request. We recieved payment in full on account XXXXXXXXXX on 11/19/15 from your HSA. Notification was sent to CCI the following day. The statement you received from CCI was generated prior to them receiving notificaiton that your account was paid in full. Both of these accounts reflect a balance of $0.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/23) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Assoc Dir
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: marti.klutho@stlukes'stl.com
I have reviewed the account and found that an authorizaton for treatment and financial responsibility form was signed by...

the mother at the time of service. The patient's mother also called us on 8/18/11 to provide Medicaid information and again on 10/23/12 when her son's calims were denied. The patient's mother called several other times over the last few years to change her address, set up a payment plan and to make payments. Hes son has two accounts. One had been paid in full and the other one has a balance in the amount of $125.00. Because the mother qualfieis for a financial assistance discount, we are adjusting the balance on the other account to reflect $0.

The Sleep Medicine and Research Center is a department of St. Luke’s Hospital and provides services as an outpatient clinic not a physician practice.  As a department of the hospital, we cannot bill as a physician practice, and therefore, physician and hospital services are billed separately....

In an attempt to make this process clear to the patients and families that we serve, the hospital has created a number of notices so that the information is provided in advance of the service.  These notices include; a document sent with the new patient paperwork that describes in detail the two part billing structure and the most common codes billed for the professional and technical portions; the posting of this same notice on the sleep medicine services website; an additional sign, advising of the separate bills, posted in the waiting room; and a form, with the explanation of billing practices, that is provided to the patient or guarantor, that must be signed prior to the visit.   In general practice, we do advise the patient of the reason for each form that is provided at the initial visit.  I have monitored the check in process and have observed this occurring.  However, I cannot say with complete assurance that a detailed explanation was provided in any specific case.  Due to HIPAA regulations, I cannot confirm that Ms [redacted] is a patient of the Sleep Center.  Since Ms. [redacted] provided her contact information, we have reached out to her.  She had an extended conversation with the Office Manager, [redacted].  Ms. [redacted] feels that Ms. [redacted] has a better understanding of the processes but that Ms. [redacted] still feels that the hospital should find a way to combine the charges into a single bill.    In view of the fact that the patient acknowledges signing the billing statement, I feel she holds some responsibility for the charges due.  However, since I cannot say with complete certainty that the clerical staff provided a detailed explanation with the form, I am willing to offer a 50% reduction in any portion not covered by her insurance for the visit that she has indicated. The billing notice provided to patients in advance of the appointment is attached.

Homeowner has contacted Homexx with respect to the garage moisture which Homexx did send out a tech multiple times to investigate and the results of the investigation, which has been explained to client, was due to the insulation and drywall application which was completet by homeowner supplied...

trade or homeowner themselves after possession.  There was no evidence of leaking or water entering the garage.  With respect to the grading Homexx was notified of this by the client on June 29,2016 which Homexx is investigating.

A Homexx representative visited the site several weeks ago to examine the site.  The representative informed the customer that Homexx would need to contact [redacted] (The survey company that set the garage elevation) as Homexx does not set the elevations, and the city regarding the potential garage issue.  The customer informed the representative that [redacted] had already done 2 site visits and also claimed the garage was too low.  After meeting with [redacted],  Homexx was informed that the garage was precisely where it was supposed to be in terms of elevation and placement (according to the rough grade and final grade surveys).  [redacted] also informed Homexx that the customer must had been mistaken because they had never done a site visit and the [redacted] employee that the customer mentioned is strictly office staff.  The Homexx representative then contacted the City of Leduc grading department to discuss the customers claim that the City also confirmed the garage was too low.  After talking with both City inspectors it was apparent the customer was again mistaken.  Both City representatives denied saying the garage was to low and one even went as far as to say in could have been set a foot lower.  The City representative did say that it would have been easier if we had allowed more room on the sides of the garage in order to allow the dirt to be built up higher but also there could potentially be other ways in achieving a similar result by making changes to the final grade. This was also not a point of concern for the client as they indicated to Homexx representative that it drains well on the sides.  Homexx next step was to review the survey results from the rough grade (performed by Homexx contractor and the final grade (performed by customer hired trade) against the engineered designed plot plan.  The findings were a bit confusing as the garage pad elevation was almost exactly to the hundredth of a meter of where it was designed.  The rough grade was between 3-5 inches below final) design grade to allow for black dirt at final grade.  The final grade, after black dirt and sod, ended up being between 1.25-8 inches below final engineered designed grade.  The only explanation for this is the contractor who performed the final grade decided to alter the rough grade, deviate from the design elevations, and created their own grading elevation points.  The Homexx representatives main concern over grading was between the fence and garage; however, the customer told the representative that was not an issue, that it drains well, and was even better before she built up the dirt along the fence with the soil from the post holes.   To sum up…  Homexx had built the garage at the correct elevation and according to plan.  Everything was built in accordance with what the City approved in the development and building permits.  The issues for which the customer has failed in obtaining a final grade approval was a result of improper grading performed by the customers hired trade after possession.  As a gesture of good will Homexx is willing to alter the garage in a way that could solve some of the customers final grading problems as long as she is happy with it at Homexx’s expense of around $900.  We have called the customer multiple times asking her to call back so we can quickly and accurately discuss her issue and how Homexx can potentially help answer questions to avoid anymore confusion and how Homexx can potentially assist as a gesture of goodwill.  The customer refuses to call back and has recently emailed our service to inform us she will not correspond over the phone.     As for the mould inside the garage, nothing has changed from previous inspection’s.   There is no water entering the garage from the outside.  The mould could be caused by several factors including but not limited to; -  running a non-vented gas heater inside the garage - heating your car inside the garage and not properly letting it vent afterward -etc. Moisture is coming from the inside and not being allowed to escape.  Homexx did not insulate or drywall the garage and cannot speak with certainty whether that could be an issue also. Homexx has inspected for leaks to the roof and siding and have found there to be none.  Also it does not in any way appear to be entering do to grading issues either

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Sincerely,
[redacted] ## need to add:  all moisture still moving to the west side of the garage where it has already been graded and sod laid.  Moisture just sits in the grass.  Will be sending pictures t the City of Leduc as soon as we have a good rainfall.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 10, 2015/07/07) */
Responding to the complaint from Chad Nelson
The customer has been notified regarding the process of the seasonal items. The sand on the property will be dealt at the time of the grading. The grading company will remove or haul in dirt as...

required. The rough grade has just been completed with the concrete. The rough grade still is required to inspected and a certificate from pal's that will be provided. This process takes 1-2 weeks. thanks
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 12, 2015/07/08) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
A manager from the company got in touch with me and addressed my concerns.
The concrete has been completed as well as the rough grade.
I will await the inspection and certification process as outlined for the 1-2 weeks.