News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by jtokoph on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:03PM (#17860540)
> UPDATE: Monday, shortly after publication and broadcast of this story by Kaiser Health News and NPR, St. David’s said it was now willing to accept $782.29 to resolve the $108,951 balance because Drew Calver qualifies for its “financial assistance discount.”

Sounds all fine and dandy until you realize that these charges will just be made up for by people that aren't able to get NPR to publish a story about them.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by FireBeyond on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:57PM (#17861119)
When you realize that the hospital was charging $19,000 for a stent that cost $1,500, you realize that painting Calver as someone who is going to cost us all money is misdirected anger.

And, to be clear, they charged $19,000 for the stent, not "stent plus theater time to place it plus surgeon, anesthesiology, OR nurses", of course not. Those are all absolutely billed separately.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by sriram_sun on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:41PM (#17862669)
I believe there should be legal consequences for getting things this wrong. Wondering how they came up with the $19,000 number.

Also, in speaking with a vascular surgeon I know, their hourly rate is between 200-350/hr. The middlemen and hospitals have figured out how to milk this cow and they're feasting.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by ChuckMcM on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:44PM (#17862695)
Absolutely, and it is this sort of practice that all Americans could get behind legislation that made it illegal. Unfortunately we can't seem to have a civil discussion on health care to find the issues we have in common.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by nojvek on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @12:44AM (#17865700)
Our total bill for a normal delivery was 25k. 25k for a doctor and nurse to pull a baby out of the vag!

It took 2 months for the bill to arrive.

Healthcare in US is like legal extortion. You could literally bill for breathing hospital air and people would have to pay.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by zaarn on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @04:18AM (#17866613)
>You could literally bill for breathing hospital air and people would have to pay.

Don't be ridiculous. You'd be billed for air and hospital odor separately!

Though I should note that a delivery is usually more complex than simply waiting there for the little one to fall out, there is some after care and such that is being performed plus the doctor is usually not that cheap either. (They have a lot of student debt to pay off after all)

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by maxerickson on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @07:41AM (#17867428)
Their liability insurance has to cover the costs of lifetime care for any babies that are injured during delivery (juries have made this clear enough). It's not strange that they pass this cost on to mothers.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by smsm42 on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @03:24AM (#17866358)
Medical billing is a nightmare. I have HMO insurance (which means the process should be really streamlined - everything is in-house) and I once tried to figure out why certain rather simple bill item was billed certain cost. It took about three weeks, multiple calls and emails, and speaking to several people, to get to the stage where they said "this is probably because if it was classified as code X, though we can not give you rules why it is code X and not code Y, and there's no way to know upfront which it would be, we'll just send you the bill later and you pay whatever we say" and even then they couldn't answer why sometimes they billed certain percentage upfront and sometimes another, so that you end up getting different pre-payments and different bills for the same thing. This whole thing is an ungodly mess.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by lacker on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @11:54PM (#17865465)
Hospitals should be required to publicly post prices, just like fast food restaurants are now required (in some places) to publicly post the calories for each dish.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by kamaal on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @03:32AM (#17866398)
This isn't just restricted to US. It has become very common even in a country like India for doctors and hospital owners to invite their doctor buddies for 'second opinions' and looking at non-issues and then billing the patients 'consulting fees'.

There is also a huge industry built along the lines of phony testing.

The term used for that think is called 'basin test', basically samples are flushed down the basin and made up numbers are put in reports. You can put in what you like as the doctors know the patient is healthy.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by antisthenes on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:55PM (#17861755)
Hospitals should be legally mandated to accept replacement of materials in lieu of payment.

If I can source the same stents for cheaper than the hospital bills me, they should be required to erase them from the bill and accept them as material replacement.

It's not as if medical supplies are unavailable to the end consumer.

https://www.esutures.com/product/0-in-date/41-boston-scienti... Here are the stents available for under $1000.

When I had a broken finger and was uninsured, I was charged ~$40 for a finger splint that costs $7 at Walgreens (yeah, the very basic one made out of aluminum and blue foam).

Also, a word of advice - never ever pay what you were sent from the hospital right away. I personally throw most medical bills in the trash and wait until they call me, then negotiate it down to a fraction of what was billed, offering to pay in cash.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by loeg on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:50PM (#17862256)
> Hospitals should be legally mandated to accept replacement of materials in lieu of payment.

> If I can source the same stents for cheaper than the hospital bills me, they should be required to erase them from the bill and accept them as material replacement.

Meh. The only reason they inflate supply costs is because that's where insurance negotiations let them. Mandating supplies must be available at-cost to consumers is just a stupid cost-shifting game. Consumers shouldn't care in particular about the cost of supplies — overall cost is what matters.

Price-fixing in general does not really work. The difference is made up somewhere. Things that would actually reduce pricing stupidity and surprise bills are obvious things like: increased pricing transparency, consumer stake in reducing costs (HDHPs are a stab in this direction), and single payer.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Marazan on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:50PM (#17862757)
Health care is not a regular market. You can't shop around for emergency care when your leg is severed or you are unconscious in a car accident.

Healthcare can and should be heavily regulated, its not like buying a hammer.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by loeg on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @08:27PM (#17873212)
Emergency care is not a great market to be a buyer in, but that does not change that market economics apply. And it is beside the point. The vast majority of healthcare is boring, predictable, non-emergency expenses that can be shopped around.

I agree that regulation makes sense, just not with the extremely specific proposal that medical devices be sold at cost (or whatever slightly higher unit cost is available to consumers).

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by antisthenes on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:59PM (#17862334)
Trivially disproven by UK's health care system, which consistently ranks #1 in the world by outcomes and employs price caps for health care suppliers.

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/press-release/2017/new-11-c...

> Mandating supplies must be available at-cost to consumers is just a stupid cost-shifting game.

That's not what I suggested in my post at all.

Also, if it reduces costs for the end consumer, what's the harm? Why should consumers subsidize hospitals with cutthroat billing departments who make up numbers out of thin air?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by hathathat on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:31PM (#17863088)
> Trivially disproven by UK's health care system

Not trivially? [1]

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/18/uk-cancer-su...

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by loeg on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @08:35PM (#17873262)
NHS is a single-payer system, which is one of the solutions I proposed.

Yes, mandating supplies be sold at-cost is exactly what you proposed:

> Hospitals should be legally mandated to accept replacement of materials in lieu of payment.

> If I can source the same stents for cheaper than the hospital bills me, they should be required to erase them from the bill and accept them as material replacement.

And to address:

> Also, if it reduces costs for the end consumer, what's the harm?

The problem is in the condition. At the end of the day, ineffective regulation increases costs for the consumer.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by prirun on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:54AM (#17868214)
Are you suggesting that a sick person, recovering from an operation, be responsible for researching prices on the parts that were used in surgery? Most do not have the time or expertise for that, nor would anyone want to do it.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by antisthenes on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @01:01PM (#17869822)
Have your spouse/relative shop around for replacement while you recover. Or be destitute for 10 years after being bankrupted by medical bills. I know which one I'd prefer.

> Most do not have the time or expertise for that, nor would anyone want to do it.

Is that a joke? You can find most of those things with a 30 second Google search. I thought this was a forum with technically apt people?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by senorjazz on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:32PM (#17863099)
> Also, if it reduces costs for the end consumer, what's the harm?

Less profit for the company.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by JeffreyKaine on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:16PM (#17861955)
Is anyone working on an app that can do this? There were those parking ticket negotiating apps for a bit. I wonder if there is a way to systemize the negotiation process here. I bet you could charge people up to 10% of the money you save them.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:47PM (#17862223)
> never ever pay what you were sent from the hospital right away

This is actually good advice. It shocked me when I realised it. But it’s good advice.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by dawnerd on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:30PM (#17863081)
People are surprised when I tell them I simply refused the 3k dollar (after insurance) couple hour hospital bill for having the flu. They couldn't tell me why two tylenols, a saline drip, and a prescription cost that much. (I was vomiting blood which is why I was taken in).

They ended up dropping the bill altogether as insurance had already paid them.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by senorjazz on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:36PM (#17863113)
> They couldn't tell me why two tylenols, a saline drip, and a prescription cost that much

I know the US system is different to what I grew up with (UK NHS), but I have had similar "treatment" when ill as a tourist in 3rd world countries: couple of pills / drip.

I understand that the difference of systems in regards to extensive care, but a couple of pills and a drip - why on earth is such basic care just not free to all?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by jimbokun on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @06:05PM (#17863346)
Have you been following the quality of people running our government?

I mean, I know this seems like just a snarky political comment. But it's just the honest answer. Our federal government is simply completely dysfunctional right now, incapable of solving anything.

For what it's worth, "Medicare for All" has been polling increasingly higher recently, due to more Americans being basically ready to give up on the current private system entirely.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by leesalminen on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @07:31PM (#17863874)
> dysfunctional right now

Just now? It’s seemed dysfunctional to me since I was capable of understanding government, circa 15 years ago. My parents felt the same way 30 years ago, and their parents felt the same way 50 years ago.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by amanaplanacanal on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @01:41AM (#17865945)
It's dysfunctionaler.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by logfromblammo on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:16PM (#17862962)
Nope. No way. Have we learned nothing from "fulfilled by Amazon" counterfeits?

The supply chain has to be verifiable as genuine goods from the factory to the hospital floor. Trying to verify the authenticity of patient-supplied replacements would be a nightmare.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by antisthenes on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:51PM (#17863243)
Then force hospitals to price match or force them to show YOU, the customer, how much the item actually cost when it was delivered to them for storage.

I wasn't actually seriously suggesting that patients be required to source the item physically, then physically deliver it to the hospital in person.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by loeg on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @08:36PM (#17873267)
Yes. It would be expensive, and that cost would be pushed onto consumers in some other way.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by mythrowaway1124 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:14PM (#17861932)
Honest question - does this really work? I have tried it once or twice without success. Are there particular 'magic phrases' you need to use, or is it jut a question of persistence? Does it impact your credit?
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by antisthenes on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:50PM (#17862250)
> Are there particular 'magic phrases' you need to use, or is it jut a question of persistence?

My situations varied, but when I had no insurance and was living off of savings, I found a generic "hardship" form and explained my situation to them - they waived 80% of the fee without much resistance. This is compared to the laughable discount of 2% they offered me on the spot if I paid in cash (at the moment of the visit)

In other situations, I'd imagine it's more a question of persistence, but I'd venture to say you can knock off at least 50% on _any_ hospital bill.

I recently bought a house, and my credit was 800+, so I don't think it does in any appreciable way.

That wasn't the gist of my post though. I was advocating more to resist the bullshit and to legislate something that allows the customer to replace materials instead of paying a hugely marked up item.

Same concept would be applicable, for example, for a car mechanic shop. Just because they billed me $600 for brake pads doesn't mean that they've actually provided me with a 10x markup of value on having bought brake pads myself for $60 - at some point this needs to be treated as "usury" (I don't know if there's a word for exorbitant markup on a regular good).

Another thing I would add - don't put your social security number on medical forms. I've never seen it enforced and there's no medical reason for them to have it.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by noelsusman on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @07:10PM (#17863738)
Hospitals generally operate on <5% margins. If you force them to provide supplies at cost then they'll have to get that revenue from somewhere else.

Also, people like you who force hospitals to chase you down to pay a bill are part of the reason why it's so expensive in the first place.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by gowld on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @09:03PM (#17864342)
The hospital in OP article is part of HCA, that has perpetuated $billions in fraud profits. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital_Corporation_of_Amer...
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by ArchTypical on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:21PM (#17861999)
Paying 300-500/mo for decades, as a chronic heart patient here. I've had multiple open heart surgeries and nothing sweeter than paying 6k for the recovery room and 0 for the surgery (along with sweet receipts for 1mil in aggregate surgery costs). The separate billing is a pointless red herring, in context of the article.

$10,920 for room charges is absolutely ludicrous.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by linker3000 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:23PM (#17863034)
In the UK and paying a monthly National Insurance tax:

About 5 years ago, I had 6 weeks in hospital, a total of 3 angiograms, one MRI scan...and then 5 stents (should have been 4, but they tore something and had to put in a covered one!).

The wait was mainly down to an unfortunate series of events: One stent was needed in a 'tricky' place and so I was timetabled to be operated on by a specialist surgeon elsewhere, but his father fell seriously ill so he went on leave. My first op was rebooked for another hospital...and they had a 'flu outbreak so ops were postponed. Eventually I was booked in elsewhere had a one hour ambulance transport ride for 'third time lucky'.

The stents were fitted in two separate operations about two weeks apart. The most notable expense I incurred was for data top-ups on my cellphone because hospital wifi was still being setup and hadn't quite made it to my ward.

The NHS gets a lot of flak, and it's by no means perfect, but it's generally there for you when you really need it.

PS: I'm on a slew of meds for my heart condition and T2 diabetes - all free at the point of collection.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by NearAP on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:51PM (#17862766)
I'm curious - do you think the figures for room and board is generally high? Or do you just think it is high for the city?

I'm asking because a friend was in the hospital in the bay area for 7 days and his room and board was approximately $21,000

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by ArchTypical on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @06:43PM (#17913495)
I had my surgeries in the middle of Los Angeles (Kaiser - 4867 W Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90027). My insurance covered 7 days, but I paid for additional recovery time at about 2k a day.

In regard to your friend ... his 7 x 2 = $14k. That's a LOT for basically a bed, blood draws daily, limited TV and cafeteria food, but in the center of Los Angeles, that's what you get.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by opencl on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:28PM (#17860786)
There is a whole industry of "medical billing advocates" you can pay to find what is likely thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars of completely made up charges on any given US hospital bill and "negotiate" them away. You don't necessarily need press coverage though it obviously helps.

Hell one time I got a $15k bill for something insurance should have covered. Called the hospital, turns out insurance had covered it and I didn't actually owe any money at all. How many people get this kind of stuff and just pay it anyway?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by exolymph on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:34PM (#17860850)
Relevant blog post: https://meaningness.com/metablog/post-apocalyptic-health-car...

> Hiring someone became imperative for me when coordinating my mother’s care got to be a way-more-than-full-time job. (In retrospect, I wish I had done that months earlier.)

> It could also be worthwhile in less critical cases, if no one in the family can take enough time off from work, or in which you’d simply rather pay someone else to clean up after a hospital’s paperwork pollution.

> This role has developed only recently, as systems have broken down. There’s not yet a standardized term; “health care advocate” is one among several.

> Mine specializes in gerontology and dementia. Others specialize in other disease areas; or in other aspects of the administrative nightmare, such as sorting out bogus hospital bills, which frequently include fraudulent additions.

> They are not inexpensive (mine charges $150/hour), so not an option for everyone.

> There are good and not-so-good advocates. I spoke with several before hiring one. Some were clearly clueless; the one I hired last month has seemed consistently competent.

> Since they recommend particular providers, there is an inherent principal-agent problem. Ask if they get any compensation from services they recommend. Take their recommendations with a grain of salt in any case.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by huevosabio on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:36PM (#17860880)
Billing "mistakes" seem to be standard practice.

I went through surgery at the Stanford Hospital, using Stanford's insurance. Prior to the surgery, they charged me $2000, the out of pocket maximum. Then, a couple of weeks post-surgery. I got another $250 bill. I had to spend the whole day on the phone first with the hospital, then the insurance, and then the hospital.

Turns out, that all I had to pay was $250, that the hospital had made a mistake in billing me $2000 at the door. I got my money back a month later.

I would normally attribute this to ineptitude. But the frequency and scale with which this happens, reeks of widespread scams.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by acomar on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:39PM (#17860910)
Yea, but to hire a medical billing advocate, you need: 1) knowledge/information that they exist and that hospital bills are BS, and 2) money to pay the advocate AND the reduced bill. If the final bill is $800 and the advocate gets a cut of the savings, how many people in dire straights are likely to be able to afford that? Keep in mind, most Americans don't have 1k in savings, living pay check to pay check because they have no choice. Facing a 100k bill, people are more likely to wait for the collector to show up and then declare bankruptcy, facing damage to their already poor credit, garnishment of already subsistence wages, etc..

I'm much less worried about the folks who pay it anyway than I am about the folks whose lives are destroyed by an industry predating on people in the worst of circumstances.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by benmowa on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:41PM (#17860931)
sounds like an opportunity....
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by acomar on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:57PM (#17861115)
For what? Lay out a business plan in this area for me that doesn't take money from the worst off.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by PurpleBoxDragon on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:11PM (#17861261)
If you make money off them but save them more money than you costs, it is still towards their benefit. The only problem occurs when you start working with the hospital to create even more arcane bills that you get into immoral territory.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by acomar on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:30PM (#17861466)
That's exactly the circumstance I outlined previously. This plan has you taking the debts of somebody who cannot afford to pay, reducing them to something above the actual cost, then asking them to pay the higher amount. You are making money from the least able to pay and profiting from a system driving people into bankruptcy. I cannot imagine starting such a company without serious empathy issues.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by benmowa on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:50PM (#17863230)
I don't have all the answers, but here's where i'd start:

https://gist.github.com/ndarville/4295324

I'd start with a mentally forced mashup for each to get a few that might work. e.g. "If i've got to make money by lead generation with a medical bill review service/app, how could i do it?"

Then i'd focus on how we'd drive value to the consumers.

Then think about driving value to others parties who may be willing to pay for something similar.

ie would pharmaceutical and medical device companies be willing to communicate directly with these consumers?

note i'm not saying its easy by any means, but i do think its a real problem that could take off if an elegant and worthwhile solution came about.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Rapzid on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:54PM (#17861737)
I had a hernia surgery shortly after a plan change. The hospital believed insurance wouldn't cover, so they discussed cash pricing with me of around 7k. The insurance ended up covering their portion with me paying about 2k out of pocket.

But then I almost had a hard attack when the statement arrived. The first number I saw was 24k, WTF!! Well, reading on there was a very large "discount" applied and the final bill to the insurance company was about right. I could only imagine though, that under some circumstance, the hospital would have tried to stick me with that totally bogus 24k bill had the insurance not covered it or the pricing not been negotiated in advance..

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by LanceH on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:17PM (#17861964)
A key element here is do not pay immediately. Once you pay, they stop working on the problem entirely.

I'm not saying, "ignore it and it goes away." Just that the billing side of things has no interest in working when they already have your money.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bobmarley1 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:09PM (#17861237)
Millions of people no doubt.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by achoped on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:47PM (#17860998)
Not always. My mom had a quadruple bypass about 6 years ago during a gap year where she stopped working but didn't have Medicare yet. Unlucky. I think she was billed for around $180k.

She told them "I'm on Social Security for $1000/mo, I'll pay you $50/mo". It was basically that or sending it to collections and never getting a dime from a retiree. So they accepted and told her a "non-profit" paid for the doctor's portion of the bill, which was all but about $40k.

She'll probably be around another 10 years max, which means she'll end up paying about $10k of that balance.

Medical debt is the least concerning type of debt for most lenders. If you ever fall into this hole, don't sweat it. [Unsolicited advice.] Just let it go to collections. You'll get harassed for a little over a year. Debt older than a year is almost never pursued by collections agencies. After things quiet down start sending letters to the credits agencies saying the collections debt has been settled. The collections agency will usually slip up and not respond at some point and it'll be gone from your credit history.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by gav on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:59PM (#17861794)
I worked with somebody who at 23 was bitten by a cat and it got infected. She didn't want to seek medical treatment even though her hand swelled up like crazy--"I don't have insurance, I will get better". I basically forced her to go to the hospital and she ended up spending a couple of days in the ICU. They told her if she waited another day, she might not have made it.

Total cost, something around $23,000 I think. This is somebody who was making maybe $10/hr. They took a payment plan of around $15/month, so she will be paying it back for the next 128 years.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by achoped on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:19PM (#17861989)
Another anecdote about my mom. A few months ago she was rushed to the hospital for symptoms of a pulmonary embolism. She spent 36 hours in the critical care unit. They couldn't determine what caused her episode; no clots, etc. They charged her $25k for that. That's how fucked up the situation is. A single night in a hospital that may save your life ends up costing almost what your kid/grandkid is paying for a year of college.

Recently she got a bill for $250 for the ambulance, which she paid, and another letter saying her bill for the hospital stay was settled. She told me she would have offered $15/mo had they held her to the $25k or told them to screw off if they didn't accept. They're not even bothering anymore.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by mjcl on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:15PM (#17861308)
> Medical debt is the least concerning type of debt for most lenders.

Just another data point, a large property management company I used to work for specifically exempted bankruptcies due to medical debt when calculating applicant credit scores.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by achoped on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:55PM (#17861745)
I have a friend who sells debtor data for a living. He literally sells Excel spreadsheets of debtor data (name, address, SSN, amount owed, etc) to collections agencies for $5k-$25k a pop. He makes mid-six figures doing it. The quality of the data is what commands the price. He said the least desirable debt are debts older than a year and medical debt. He can't even give that crap away.

Also, if you're ever called by a collections agency, you should ask them to provide proof that they actually hold the debt you're obligated to pay. In some cases they've just bought the data, usually from another collections agency who couldn't collect, and they're trying to shake you down. Once you use the magic phrase "provide proof" they give up and stop hassling you, because they have no proof.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Rapzid on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:01PM (#17861808)
I used to worked at Wells Fargo and my friend in sales said the mortgage underwriters typically didn't blink at medical debt.

I wonder what would happen if it was widespread knowledge that the smart money was in never paying it.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by fredsanford on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:44PM (#17862694)
I'm not sure I believe that debt over a year old is not pursued. Anecdotal, but...

I've had 4 different cell phone numbers in my lifetime. All of them were still getting debt collection calls or still are up to 15 years later. I've had my current number for over 15 years. I'd love to meet Tanya who ran up the bills for my current number.

Also, I had my appendix rupture right after getting laid off and going on COBRA. I am still getting occasional calls about that even though the insurance eventually paid off. That was over 10 years ago.

COBRA is another scam. $1650 per month that my employer was paying ~$600 for.

Scumbaggery is rife in the insurance industry. The Rainmaker should be required watching...

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by 1stranger on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:45PM (#17863190)
> COBRA is another scam. $1650 per month that my employer was paying ~$600 for.

COBRA is whatever the employer was paying + 2% administration fee.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by fredsanford on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @11:21PM (#17865284)
Sorry, you're wrong, unless my former employer is lying to the gov't. I believed a similar story
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by gowld on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @09:07PM (#17864378)
If you tell them to stop calling you they are legally required to stop or you can sue them for statutot damages
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by fredsanford on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @11:19PM (#17865270)
The debt keeps getting resold. I'd have to be able to predict the future...
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by defen on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:27PM (#17862061)
> Just let it go to collections. You'll get harassed for a little over a year. Debt older than a year is almost never pursued by collections agencies.

I don't understand. Is there no penalty to not paying other than a hit on your credit score? Can't you end up with wage garnishments or liens or something like that?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by dawnerd on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:43PM (#17863174)
It'll definitely show up on your credit report. The key is a lot of lenders supposedly will just look past it. Ultimately it's up to them if you get a loan or not, not just based on the number alone.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by observer12 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @06:15PM (#17863415)
One caveat, you definitely want to contest the debt in writing regularly. If it goes away because the collector failed to respond you are fine. If it goes away because they "forgive" the debt, its seen as income by the IRS and you will pay taxes on it. So imagine the tax bill if 200K of "income" is added to your taxes one year.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by UncleEntity on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:19PM (#17862985)
Where I live (Arizona) there's a statute of limitations on consumer debt, think it's 2 years for random bills and 3 years for recurring payments...or something similar.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by gowld on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @09:10PM (#17864400)
That sounds like legalized theft. Why pay any non recurring bills ever?
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Sohcahtoa82 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @08:06PM (#17864032)
Nope. Wage garnishments and liens only happen with debts to the government such as unpaid taxes, child support, or fines.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by defen on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @11:09PM (#17865211)
Ok but can't the hospital (or the collections agency) take you to court? Let's say you have 100k bill from the hospital that you just ignore. They sell it to a collections agency for 60k. You refuse to pay the collections agency. Now what happens?
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Sohcahtoa82 on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @04:08PM (#17871461)
Did some more research on this...

Yes, the hospital or collections agency can sue you to try to garnish your wages. If they win, you're boned.

If they lose, or they never sue for garnishment, it's unclear what happens if you refuse to pay. From what I can tell, the debt disappears from your credit report after seven years, but the debt is still valid and they can still try to recover the money from you, but they won't be able to use the courts to do it.

However, there's always the option of declaring bankruptcy. Even if they garnish wages, declaring bankruptcy will wipe it away. Obviously, that's the nuclear option and will destroy your credit rating for seven years.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by jhayward on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:06PM (#17860570)
> Sounds all fine and dandy until you realize that these charges will just be made up for by people that aren't able to get NPR to publish a story about them.

No, St. David's has already fully recouped their costs and then some. They were simply trying to extract as much money as the stone could bleed.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by lacker on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:19PM (#17860703)
I was going to respond saying that most hospitals are nonprofits and aren't actually making a great profit margin off this sort of overcharging. But then I looked it up and St. David's, despite having a religious nonprofit-sounding name, is actually owned by HCA Healthcare, which is a for-profit that has almost 4x'd its stock price over the past five years while acquiring more hospitals to grow. So, yeah, this one is about corporations squeezing money out of people because they can.

sources:

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-transactions-...

https://www.google.com/search?q=NYSE:HCA

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by jhayward on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:37PM (#17860890)
> despite having a religious nonprofit-sounding name

They came by the name honestly, but it is indeed a shame the way it has gone since the St. David's Foundation partnered with HCA.

The hospital(s) were originally founded and run by St. David's Episcopal and were one of the first and foremost hospitals in Austin, with very high quality care and good service to the community.

After operating them for nearly 75 years, and growing to an enormous enterprise, it became clear that a church congregation simply couldn't and shouldn't be operating them any further and they were spun out. Some of the profits are still sent back to the foundation for community health care grants.

This particular wealth extraction strategy would never have occurred under church leadership.

(disclaimer: I was a member of the church during this period and hold it in very high regard)

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by diab0lic on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:47PM (#17861007)
My ex worked for HCA and she insisted that she could tell you the exact cost of a procedure before undergoing it.

Well at some point she needed surgery (at HCA), and about five months later after dealing with 10 < x < 20 bills including one we'd never heard about until collections came knocking she just looked at me and said "Nobody knows what this is going to cost." It really bums me out that a human being working in healthcare here isn't able to even remotely predict the cost of a procedure at the hospital at which they work.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by dv_dt on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:33PM (#17860838)
For hospitals which really are non-profit a) the non-profit status doesn't prevent price gouging b) even if acting as a traditional non-proft, they may do so to balance revenue against people with no insurance and no ability to pay. (a burden we load onto hospitals that we should actually be sharing much more explictly and universally across our nation).
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by gowld on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @09:01PM (#17864331)
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by hogwild on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @05:50PM (#17863237)
HCA is owned by Bill Frist's family. Dirty stuff.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by ta76567656 on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @07:52AM (#17867485)
Maybe they could change their name to "Hospital of the Temple Moneychangers"
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:29PM (#17861456)
> squeezing money out of insurance companies because they can

FTFY.

But seriously, how can it possibly be the hospital's fault for doing exactly what the law and market incentives give them every reason to do? There's almost no downward pressure on prices: little competition, no transparent pricing, huge barriers to market entry, and third party payers.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by s73v3r_ on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:14PM (#17861934)
"But seriously, how can it possibly be the hospital's fault for doing exactly what the law and market incentives give them every reason to do? "

Because they're the ones actually doing it? Because they're run by adults who are fully capable of taking responsibility for their actions?

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by InitialLastName on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @09:47AM (#17868165)
The US (and others, but the US especially) has a long-standing practice of divesting corporations from the responsibility for their actions.

Worse, it's frequently the same people who argue that corporations are "people" arguing that corporations as a whole shouldn't be held responsible for their actions.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:17PM (#17879228)
A profit-making corporation exists to make a profit, which isn't illegal or immoral, so I fail to see what 'responsibility' they have other than continuing to do what their shareholders have literally given them money to do. Your problem is with the system, not with my grandma whose pension fund is invested in the hospital.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by lacker on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @11:52PM (#17865460)
For what it's worth, I'm not interested in blaming the corporation for trying to raise profits. I just think that clearly the system is not ideal, and the right way to fix the system is probably different depending on whether the diagnosis is 1/ inefficiently-operating nonprofits or 2/ non-consumer-happiness-optimizing corporations.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:09PM (#17879142)
Right, I definitely agree with you. My only point was that it's easy to point to villains but real solutions are structural.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Sohcahtoa82 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @07:44PM (#17863943)
Nobody's denying the facts you gave...lack of competition, lack of transparent pricing, etc.

But to use people's lives as leverage to extract absurd amounts of money goes well beyond being immoral, it's just downright evil.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:14PM (#17879193)
If making money from using people's lives as leverage is evil, then let's go ahead and condemn doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, insulin injector manufacturers, and lifeguards while we're at it.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Sohcahtoa82 on Thursday August 30, 2018 @02:27PM (#17879335)
I'm almost rendered speechless at the absurdity of your suggestion.

Of course they deserve to be paid. And paid quite nicely, too, considering the education levels needed to work such jobs (Lifeguards, obviously requiring significantly less than doctors)!

But they can be paid nicely while charging reasonable prices. The $164k the hospital charged that man for his heart attack is beyond unreasonable.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bmmayer1 on Monday September 03, 2018 @12:56PM (#17903603)
But who gets to decide what is 'reasonable?' The point of the parent post is that there are no forces keeping prices down besides this vague standard of 'reasonableness', which obviously isn't very useful. Shame doesn't bring down prices; competition and structural reforms do.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by manigandham on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:17PM (#17860681)
The point is that the bill won't just go away for other people, regardless of how much profit is made and whether costs are already covered by the hospital.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by jimmydddd on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:55PM (#17861088)
What's strange is that many hospitals seem to legitimately be in financial trouble. You often hear about smaller hospitals not being able to make it financially, and being gobbled up by larger health networks. How can I be paying them $600 for an asprin, and other fake charges, and they still can't make any money?
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by FireBeyond on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:01PM (#17861150)
Well, you'll notice on this bill in the article they've taken to charging "near retail" pricing for aspirin, and generic pricing for common drugs many of us will know the price of (still relatively outrageous, but $1/pill for aspirin, $10/pill for metoprolol).

Why? Not out of the kindness of their hearts. They know that their name showing up with a bill for $500 for ASA is bad PR, so better to make those common things realistic, and pad their numbers elsewhere (like charging $19,500 for a $1,500 stent)...

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by bobmarley1 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:11PM (#17861263)
Like in Education the glut of "Administrators" is certainly not helping.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by toomuchtodo on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:14PM (#17860650)
Yes, but OPs point is they will still do this to people who can't get media attention. It continues to be a systemic issue that must be fixed.

Disclaimer: Universal healthcare advocate

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by samfisher83 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:06PM (#17860569)
The hospital already got 50k from the insurance company. The article also the treatment should have cost ~25k.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by agumonkey on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:21PM (#17860712)
The power of companies. They write words and numbers on a stamped letter and now it's god spell.

I once played dumb to an importer abusing fees, after monthes of bouncing mails to different people babbling the same thing over and over, then dealing with a 'lawyer firm' who behaved the same (basically nobody knew precisely what they were talking about). They suddenly accepted to give me a rebate of NN%. So I received a new bill with 100$ - '80$ promotional deal' = 20$ (normal fee). A very partial grin ensued.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by pc86 on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:23PM (#17860746)
I don't think anyone is treating the company's word as law. Just about everything is open to negotiation just about all of the time.

I'm assuming you mean "gospel" and not the 1971 Broadway musical.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by agumonkey on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @03:48AM (#17866471)
People have and will pay the minute they receive an official looking letter.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by FactolSarin on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:07PM (#17860579)
Yeah, more like he qualifies for the "got some sympathetic media coverage" discount. That's not something most people can count on.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by badcede on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:37PM (#17860896)
>Sounds all fine and dandy until you realize that these charges will just be made up for by people that aren't able to get NPR to publish a story about them.

Sounds a bit like getting support from Google.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by apetresc on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:35PM (#17860857)
Later in that correction paragraph, it says:

> In a statement, the hospital said this offer was contingent on Calver submitting his application for a discount based on his household finances. Calver disputed that he owes any additional money to St. David’s and said this situation should have been resolved long before now.

I might be misreading, but is this saying that Calver isn't going to accept even the $700 charge, just to make a statement? I obviously side with him but this seems like a crazy stand to take on principle alone.

Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by rabidrat on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @01:40PM (#17860919)
He shouldn't have to submit for a "discount" based on his "household finances" anyway! What if he doesn't qualify after all? Does he owe $100k if he makes more than $70k/year? Actually what level of income should be the low threshold for having to pay $100k after insurance for your life-critical health event?
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by apetresc on Thursday August 30, 2018 @08:18PM (#17881964)
I'm not saying he's wrong on the principle. I'm saying I wouldn't have the guts to risk $108,300 just for a chance to maybe win a moral victory over $700.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by noonespecial on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:51PM (#17862764)
Sounds like the usual billing practice of "send him a bill for everything he'll ever have and then graciously negotiate it down merely everything he's got now".
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by BLanen on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @02:31PM (#17861488)
Can you stop blaming individuals and start blaming the people who set up and keep the current system?
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by hellofunk on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @03:57PM (#17862312)
I think this is pretty common. If you get a hospital bill and the insurance already paid a lot, call up the hospital and complain, and it will often be lowered. This happened to me once, a $15k bill was reduced to $3k. The insurance had already paid $50k or so. Hospitals don't really seem to care about the extra portion the patient is supposed to pay. The try to get it, but don't make much fuss when you challenge it, since they already got what they really wanted, the insurance company's money.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by maxerickson on Wednesday August 29, 2018 @07:39AM (#17867420)
Any unmet costs would likely be made up by other patients, but the charges have nothing to do with the costs, so who knows what impact this has.
Re:Insured, but Still Owing $109K for a Heart Attack by Marazan on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @04:47PM (#17862734)
No, it just means they will make a little less profit.