UCHealth Primary Care - Castle Rock Reviews (%countItem)
UCHealth Primary Care - Castle Rock Rating
Address: 4404 Barranca Ln, Castle Rock, Colorado, United States, 80104-7432
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Web: |
|
E-mails: |
Sign in to see
|
Add contact information for UCHealth Primary Care - Castle Rock
Add new contacts
I have left multiple messages for somebody to call me back. No one has called me back. I did all my lab work. I establish care, I asked for anyone and/or office manager to call me back and no one can call me back! I need a prescription refill and no one would call me back. They are forcing me to see a different doctor and pay another copay just to get my prescription refill when I was just in there.
Hello,
Thank you for bringing this concern to our attention. We have reviewed the customer complaint and found that the concern was resolved with the customer by our clinic management on 6/19/2020. Our clinic management is continuously working with staff in order to improve the patient experience and is taking steps to help mitigate this kind of frustration in the future.
We appreciate customer feedback and thank her for the opportunity to improve the level of service we provide our patients.
Sincerely,
***
Risk Management RN
I went to this urgent care on 12/19/2018 and saw 1 Dr. and a nurse. I am being billed now by multiple docs and duplicate charges for the same thing. I've called this billing dept. multiple times spending hours on the phone to dispute and have this reviewed. I've gotten various reasons for why I am being billed in this manner but zero resolution or ownership. The latest was you saw a PA and a real Dr. has to review his work so you will be charged for their services too. Incorrect excessive billing and a refusal to fix it or even acknowledge the issues I advised them of in my dispute. Bundling and then unbundling as well as not billing according to my contract *** (BCBS). I have contractual benefits that they are ignoring and continually billing me for. The medical biller must confirm that every code is, in fact, billable. Whether or not a code is billable depends on the payer (BCBS), generally the insurance provider. In the case of insurance providers, each payer has a set of rules that determine what they can and cannot be billed for under their policyholder’s plan. It is important for the medical biller to be compliant with the payer’s rules. If a bill is sent out to a payer that includes charges outside of these rules, the bill may be denied and returned to the physician’s office to be corrected.
Complaint #***
Thank you for bringing this concern to our attention and allowing us the opportunity to review. We are sorry to hear of this patient’s experience. In order to address her concerns concisely and to ensure that they are addressed in full, they will be listed numerically:
Patient reports that she went to the Urgent Care on 12/19/18, having seen one doctor and one nurse; unfortunately, she reports to have been billed by multiple doctors. In review of the charges associated with this visit, the patient was billed for services under two people: a physician and a medical assistant. Under the medical assistant, charges include: Laboratory work, the office visit, and the electrocardiogram (EKG) tracing. These charges were reviewed and determined to be correct. There are two physician charges to account for the two EKG reports, or physician interpretations. Although the patient was only charged for one EKG tracing, she was billed for two EKG reports/MD interpretations of the tracing. Per her medical record, two separate EKG reports were run and determined to be abnormal. Based on the documentation, it was determined that this was correctly billed to insurance at the time and this is what was explained to the patient in her follow-up with the billing team. After further review, it was determined that this duplicate report was not done as a result of the patient’s disease process, nor due to any reported malfunction of the EKG tracer. The personnel conducting the EKG determined that the lead was not attached well enough to the patient and that the reading was not correct; therefore, the staff member ran a second report. As a courtesy, all charges for Physician EKG Interpretation (CPT 93010) have been adjusted off. There were no individual charges for the physician assistant (PA) or for supervision of the PA. We apologize for any miscommunication in that regard. The patient reports in her letter that *** (BCBS) was billed incorrectly and that BCBS information hadn’t been updated on her bills. She alleges that rather than investigate this concern, the billing team continued to resend the bill -which was getting denied- and then told the patient that she was going to collections. In review of the actions on this account, there were 3 separate claims filed: The first claim is for the office visit, labs, and EKG tracing. On January 19, 2019, BCBS applied $44.67 towards the patient’s deductible. The second claim is for the EKG reports, or MD interpretations of the EKG. This was denied by BCBS on 1/2/2019, stating that the expenses were incurred during a coverage lapse. When contacted, the patient advised that the coverage was through her employer and was transitioning to Cobra. On 4/3/2019, this claim was again denied, but this time as a “duplicate”. The coding team reviewed and modified, and the claim was again resubmitted for $17.00 each. Insurance reprocessed the claim and applied $12.47 for each EKG report to the patient’s deductible. The billing office adjusted off these charges at that time. The patient was not charged, nor did she pay for the amount due on either EKG report. A reimbursement to the patient is not warranted on those grounds, but the full amount of $17.00 originally charged for each report has been adjusted off of the bill. The patient indicates in her letter that she should not be charged for the EKG given that it had to be done multiple times. It was repeated due to the lack of adherence between the EKG stickers and the patient’s skin. We are in agreement that there should not be multiple charges for the EKG (there is one), nor the EKG reports (there are two). The patient’s presenting symptoms warranted this testing. Therefore, the charge for the single EKG will stand. We do sincerely apologize for her experience in this. We understand the frustration this may have caused during an already trying medical experience. The patient reported the staff’s use of tape to secure the EKG electrodes to her skin. We appreciate her for letting us know of this concern. Education has been provided to relevant staff to ensure that we use the appropriate tools and resources available in order to provide the best care to our patients. Communication concerns regarding the accuracy of EKG results have also been reported to the appropriate clinical leadership for review and follow-up. In review of the patient record and in follow-up with the involved provider, it was made clear that the recommendation for further emergency room (ER) evaluation was as a result of the patient’s medical condition at the time; this recommendation was not as a result of the EKG tracing alone. Recommendation for any patient to proceed to the ER is truly a matter of patient safety and to ensure that they receive the appropriate level of care, given the symptoms experienced at the time. The patient perceives that the billing department is ignoring contractual agreements and that they may be billing for non-billable services. We do apologize for the confusion. It has been confirmed that there are no charges to the patient for anything outside of the contractual obligation at this time. As of July 8th, 2019, the patient’s balance owed had been paid in the amount of $44.67. The account balance is $0 and has not been sent to bad debt/collections. All further adjustments made to the bill as of 7/25/2019 are as stated above. We hope this response serves to answer her questions and address her concerns. Again, we want to apologize for the frustration that this has caused. Should she wish to speak to a patient representative regarding this matter as well, she can reach out at 970-495-7346.
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: The business fails to acknowledge their responsibility in all of this and lack of service. It is not due to my frustration or misunderstanding of the billing. Nor at the time of service what was told to me by the PA and nurse. In addition I am the one who continually called in to resolve all the issues between the errors in billing from the facility. The adjustments were due to my continual calls between the Urgent Care facility and my BCBS insurance. I resolved the bill myself. I am the one who called in and asked them to resubmit each time not them.
The huge error occurred as The EOB was sent and somehow UC Health didn't apply it at the time. Fed up, I had BCBS do a shared call so all parties were on the phone at the same time. BCBS send a fax to prove the EOB was sent and the contractual obligations needed to be adjusted. Had I not chased this down they would still be billing me over $500. The EKG was upon my request not the doctors and as I stated the PA as you call him told me the reading was not 100% due to the leads not sticking and that I should go to the Hospital for an accurate one. What he put in the file to cover himself is not my problem. He said anytime I feel I need a EKG that I should just go straight to the hospital as they have the necessary better equipment and that Urgent care would just send me there anyway. I've filed this complaint to let all know of the horrible service and lack of ownership when errors occur. Consumers you are all on your own.
Sincerely
Horrible billing practices! My fiance called and made an appointment to see her regular doctor, Dr. P on Tuesday. She was told they have an opening the next day , Wednesday @ 2:15 pm. When she arrived she was told Dr. P is not in and you will be seen unless it is in our Urgent Care and the charge for that is $100.00. Our co-pay is just $25.00. She was very sick and didn't feel like arguing with them and just put it on our credit card. I called on Thursday to speak with a manager and they could not even tell me who their office manager was...! I finally got a young lady on the phone and was absolutely no help! She said my fiance was just a walk in and no appointment was scheduled, not true. she later said when your fiance made her appointment we told her Dr. P was not in on Wednesdays... Wait, she told me she did not have an appointment and then said when she made the appointment... It sounds like this is a common practice UC Health use to scam people out of money. This is clearly their mistake and they are trying to scam people out of money. I asked for a manager to call me back so they would refund me the $75.00 and I was told they would "try" to get a manager to call me back. I Received a call from a very rude Michelle that claims to be the office manager. She refused to hear my side of the story and said my fiance did not have an appointment and was no help. When I told her I was going to dispute the charge with my bank, she laughed and you have a good day and hung up on me. I called back and her staff said she refused to speak with me. If they do not refund the money I will dispute the charge. After her being so rude to us, they have lost 2 customers and I will let everyone I know how horrible this office because of her!
Our facility is aware of the current concern. The patient did not have an appointment with the provider when she presented to the office. This was investigated through our recorded scheduling system. The patient requested to be seen due to illness and our Urgent Care was offered to her, which she accepted. The insurer requires a copay per their contractual agreement, which was collected at the time of check-in to Urgent Care as is our usual process. We have reviewed the concern and reached out to customer to provide an explanation. We apologize that a primary care appointment was unable on short notice for this patient, but pleased Urgent Care services were provided for the medical need of the patient. We were unable to come to a resolution with the complainant regarding this concern.
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: They are not telling the truth! We most certainly did have an appointment because I was a witness when the appointment was made, as the call was on speakerphone. This office has very unprofessional people working there. They are rude and say whatever they want to make them look in the right. Their reviews speak for themselves. *** was very sick when she wend in and they were wanting to argue with her about an appointment. she did not want to, nor feel like a confrontation so she just paid the money and was seen. They need to do the right thing and refund the money as they know they were in the wrong and I will not let this go. It has nothing to do with us needing the money back, I am fighting this because I believe in doing the right and honest thing. If they choose not to refund or fight the dispute I have filed with my bank, I can assure them I will move forward with legal actions.
Sincerely
We apologize that Mr *** feels our response is not truthful. We have a recorded patient line scheduling system and do not have record of an appointment made for this patient with this provider on this date (3/14/2018). The patient did have an appt on 3/16/2018 at 1000 with our provider per our recorded patient line system. The patient is recorded as a "no show" for this appointment date and time. The provider does not work on the day in question (Wednesdays) at this clinic and we are unable to schedule as his template is not open on Wednesdays for patient line to place patients in his schedule. When the patient presented on 3/14/2018 to be seen, given that she did not have an appointment this day, the only services we were able to offer were our Urgent Care. We cannot refund the patients copay as services were received by the patient that day and the copay is a contractual amount with the patients insurance provider.