Five TLs with one CA - all same OC

[HoustonLynne]

Hi WhyChat – I’m still “on break” with my own TLs, as you suggested. But I am working on my Significant Other’s medicals while I wait. And I’m at a sticky point and need guidance. I’ll try to make this as clear as possible.

He had NO INSURANCE at the time of care for any of them. (He has been covered for a year now, though.)

We’ve done all the initial steps:

· opted out

· obtained hardcopy reports directly from the CRAs

· deleted all old addresses and incorrect name spellings and one SSN variation

· sent the Pre-HIPAA Dispute (handwritten, using your form) to all 3 CRAs

· waited for and received responses back from all three CRAs

 

My challenge stems from having disputed online and then sending “standard” DVs to all but two of the CAs on his reports last June (2013) – before I found you – so please keep that in mind as I describe the specific TLs and their current status.

 

The two I didn't DV last year were fresh collections from late 2012, so they haven’t been mucked-up by my aimless Pre-WhyChat efforts.

 

I started with a total of 12 accounts from 6 CAs, spread across the 3 CRAs:

EX – 9 total TLs from 5 total CAs (one CA holds 5 accounts totaling $1,920)

EQ – 9 TLs from a total of 3 CAs (same CA as above reporting 5 TLs; another one reporting 3 TLs)

TU – 6 TLs from a total of 3 CAs (same CA as above but reporting only 4/5 TLs they own)

 

NONE are paid; all but one are within SOL, but half of those will be out of SOL (4 yrs.) in October.

EX refused to reinvestigate 7 of 9 on that report, because of my prior disputes.

Of the 7 TLs EX refused to investigate, 2 of them are ONLY on EX, as one was never on the other 2 CRAs, and one was deleted by EQ using your Pre-HIPAA dispute this time.

 

There are 11 remaining TLs from 5 CAs, spread across all CRAs after the Pre-HIPAA disputes.

EX – 8 total TLs from 4 total CAs (one CA holds 5 accounts totaling $1,920)

EQ – 8 TLs from a total of 2 CAs (same CA as above reporting 5 TLs; another one reporting 3 TLs)

TU – 2 TLs; 2 separate CAs

 

To make matters worse, the CA who holds 5 accounts (all from the same OC) sent what would have been proper validation last year in July – billing info printed from the OC’s accounting system dated the week they sent it to me, HIPAA release forms signed by the patient, etc. But that was almost a year ago, so I’m not sure how to handle that now. The CA actually sent it to us via CMRR, so they were legit at that time. They've also continued to update their reporting almost monthly in the past year. The OC is a partnership of physician-owned, emergency/urgent-care facilities in TX.

 

Obviously this CA is my sticking point – here are the dates of service and amounts on those TLs:

1. 10/10/2010…….$360

2. 10/24/2010…….$600

3. 10/29/2010…….$360

4. 11/6/2010……...$360

5. 4/10/2011……...$240

 

All 5 are on EX & EQ – EX refused to investigate again; the CA verified them all to EQ.

TU only had 4 out of the 5 on it, and 3 were deleted in this Pre-HIPAA dispute. (Yaaay!) The only one remaining on TU is the one for $600. (Go figure.)

 

I’ve sent the HIPAA DVs to 4 out of 5 CAs, but I don’t know what to do with this CA and their 5 accounts. Again, they sent confirmation of a then-current business relationship with the OC last summer. And they are updating their reporting most months. I’m grateful TU deleted all but one TL, but they're killing us on EX & EQ, and we don’t have the money to pay these in full at this time. The total is $1,920.

 

Should I send them the HIPAA DV…?

Should I leave them alone until they’re out of SOL…?

Should I press EX to investigate them again, since TU deleted 3/4 of them on this round…?

 

As always, thanks for your tireless help -- to us and others (like the kitties!)

Edited May 31, 2014 by HoustonLynne

[Why Chat]

If you have had any communication from the "5 account" CA,

Send them the medical DV,

http://whychat.5u.com/ltrcavalhipaa.html

DO NOT DISPUTE those accounts now.

 

Wait until you are out of SOL ( 4 years from date of medical service), on all the accounts to dispute again..

I am assuming that many of these accounts are from the same health care provider??

 

SOME CAs try to illegally aggregate ( combine accounts) and sue if there has been an indication of someone trying to clean their credit.

[HoustonLynne]

Thanks, WhyChat -- we haven't received anything from this CA since they sent the medical billing records last summer, in response to the "standard DV." As mentioned above, I did dispute them with TU and EQ -- TU deleted all but the largest one; EQ verified all. So I won't be messing with these again until 4 out of 5 are out of SOL in November, because we could certainly pay the smallest one (most recent DOS) after that.

 

I'll update again after the OTHER CAs receive the medical DVs I sent and the respective CRA follow-up disputes have been processed.

[HoustonLynne]

Hi Why Chat,

 

So I mentioned earlier in this thread that we sent out the medical DVs for the accounts that were not among the ones you suggested we leave alone for now.

 

We also sent out the follow-up dispute to EQ, and they received it on Friday.

 

Of course, I know we'll be waiting for dispute results from EQ for up to 30 days, but I wanted to post the response we received from the CA.

 

One of the CAs is local, and they already received the medical DV on 6/2/2014. They printed the "responses" the same day, and they mailed them the following day (6/3/2014) via CMRR. We received it today.

 

As a refresher on this sub-set of accounts:

• There are 3 TLs from the same CA
  • Feb. '09 -- $295
  • Jan. '11 -- $295
  • April '11 -- $295
• OC is the same on all 3 -- a small physician's group that contracts with local hospital emergency departments
• Before finding your program, I disputed these last summer; they were "verified".
• I sent the CA a "standard DV" last summer, and they responded with the exact same thing they sent us this time.
• I am almost certain that they sent their "response" last year via regular mail, but this year they decided to respond with the same drivel via CMRR, perhaps to make them look more ominous and/or credible.

There is one sheet of paper for each of the 3 TLs they hold, and the grammar is rather rudimentary...not very professional at all.

I cropped off the top, which contained the addresses, date and account number.

It is on a plain white sheet of paper -- no letterhead.

The letter says to make payment to the OC or the CA, and to mail it to the address on the letter...which is the CA's address.

The 3 letters only differ in the account number listed, the DOS and the date each TL was sent to collections.

 

I am assuming this is NOT confirmation of a current business relationship between the CA and the OC, but I just want to update you and get your confirmation. I will wait to see what EQ does with the follow-up dispute, which they received yesterday. With the CA being local, this came back quickly.

[Why Chat]

Wait until your last dispute to the CRAs is finalized, then pay the OC with the HIPAA letter insert "a".

 

The CA is most certainly in a current business relationship with the OC

 

 

 

The letter says to make payment to the OC or the CA,

 

When mailing the payment, send it to the OC's address att. HIPAA compliance office.

[HoustonLynne]

Got it -- thanks, Why Chat!

[HoustonLynne]

Me again!

 

I'm in the DV phase, and I need your guidance on 2 issues not discussed in the above posts:

 

ISSUE #1: To refresh you on background, I mentioned in the original post that I had muddied the waters last year by disputing and then sending DVs (non-medical) to all but 2 TLs on my SO's reports. Both of those 2 newer accounts are for the same ER visit late 2012 -- one for the facility charge; one is the physician's bill. The one for the facility was deleted from all CRAs via the Initial Dispute, so it's a non-issue. But the physician's bill was verified (it's not the same CA as the facility TL) and I've run into a hiccup with the USPS tracking info. I sent the DV to them in FL on 5/31/2014, and the tracking got stalled on 6/5/2014 at a location 46 miles away from the CA's zip code. No updates have been scanned since last Thursday. So I'm not sure what to do. I emailed the USPS to see what the hold-up is, but prior experience tells me I probably won't get a straight answer. It still had at least 1-2 more sorts to go through before going out for delivery, so I don't think they just delivered it and forgot the last scan. What should I do on this...?

 

ISSUE #2: One of the TLs I tried to work on last year (before I found you) is only on EX. The DOS is 10/12/2010 for the physician's fee on an ER visit. ($635; he did not have insurance)

EX was delayed in getting me the response to this Initial Dispute, because they initially refused to re-investigate it due to last year's disputes. But I sent a 2nd "Initial Dispute" to EX on this one right after they bounced it back to me last month, because the TL was reporting some very weird stuff since last June: "NO STATUS" in status field; "N/A" under Type, Terms and Monthly Payment fields; "04/2011" in Date of Status Field, even though they verified it to EX in June 2013; still classified as a collection; comments field read "Account in Dispute Under Fair Credit Billing Act".

So EX re-investigated it upon receipt of my 2nd attempt to dispute last month, and it came back VERIFIED and the CA has updated all the "weird" info to reflect more "normal" reporting.

Having said that, I want to post you what the CA sent me last year, because in their 2nd letter to us, they notified us that further disputes would be classified as "frivolous" until we provide them with a more specific reason for our dispute.

 

I don't want to clutter this thread with huge images, so I hope I can just post a link to the image for viewing, without actually displaying the image. If it doesn't work, I'll PM them to you, if that's okay?

My first letter to them was a standard DV, and their 2-page response was dated July 15, 2013. Both pages were on the same letterhead for the CA, but I truncated the image on Page 2.

Page 1: http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b633/HoustonLynne/Example%20Docs/URC1_zpsd8e1dc08.png

Page 2: http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b633/HoustonLynne/Example%20Docs/URC2_zps5b7bd73b.png

 

I then sent them a demand for better validation, and they responded with this notification (Aug. 5, 2013) that our dispute was being classified as frivolous: http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b633/HoustonLynne/Example%20Docs/URC3_zps29b8033e.png

 

With the above info and the fact that they have now verified and changed the reported info on EX, what should I do with this one?

 

Thanks, Why Chat!

Edited June 10, 2014 by HoustonLynne

[Why Chat]

If it has been more than 90 days since your last communication to the CRAs on ANY account, start over:

 

http://www.whychat.5u.com/GUIDE%20HIPAA%20PROGRAM.html

[HoustonLynne]

Sorry if I made it confusing, Why Chat -- I'll try to clarify.

I started the whole HIPAA process from the beginning last month on my significant other's reports.

No contact had been made with the CAs nor CRAs regarding any of these accounts for almost a year.

But the same collection accounts (with the exception of 2) were disputed in June/July 2013 without the HIPAA program...before I found you.

 

So far we've done the following:

Opted Out

Obtained REAL Reports

Deleted Old Addresses

Sent Pre-HIPAA Disputes -- EX refused to reinvestigate the accounts we disputed in 2013; EQ verified almost everything; TU deleted most

 

Here's what's left:

EQ -- 8 Total

• Harvest Assoc...3 accounts (Per your guidance in Post #5 above, they properly validated last week and we can pay the OC with Insert 'a' if it's verified through EQ's processing of the follow-up dispute.)
• Paramount Recovery...5 accounts (Per your guidance in Post #2 above, these will be left alone until they are out of SOL beginning in October.)

EX -- 8 Total

• ARS............. 1 account (the only one remaining that was NOT disputed last year; also on TU; DV has dropped from USPS Tracking Radar)
• Franklin....... 1 account (was deleted by EQ on Initial Dispute; is now only on EX)
• United.......... 1 account (was always only on EX; the one I asked about in Post #7)
• Paramount... 5 accounts (Same as EQ: Per your guidance in Post #2 above, these will be left alone until they are out of SOL beginning in October.)

TU -- 2 Total

• ARS............ 1 account (the only one remaining that was NOT disputed last year; also on EX; DV has dropped from USPS Tracking radar)
• Paramount... 1 account (TU deleted the other 4 in Initial Dispute; all 5 are on EQ & EX. Per your guidance in Post #2 above, Paramount TLs will be left alone until they are out of SOL beginning in October.)

 

ARS (in red above) is the one that I sent the medical DV to on May 31st, and the USPS tracking info dropped off on June 5th. I have no confirmation of whether it reached the CA. It stalled 46 miles from the destination zip code. Should I send the follow-up disputes to EX & TU...? I have no "proof of delivery"...tracking looks like it's sitting in West Palm Beach, FL.

 

United (in blue above) is the one who sent responses to my DVs in July/August 2013, which I linked in Post #7 above. They told me that my 2nd demand for validation last year (right after I got their first response) was being classified as "frivolous". So I don't know if I should send them the medical DV, or if you have some other recommendation, based on the responses they sent in 2013.

 

I hope this gives a clearer picture of where I am on this.

Thanks again, Why Chat!

[Why Chat]

Are you sending your mail to the CAs certified ONLY without a return receipt or proof of delivery requested??

 

 

A CA can NOT respond that your inquiry is "frivolous" that IS the prerogative of the CRAs.

 

Any mail that requires a signature is NOT forwarded, which is why it is important to send all mail certified only.

 

If you have not received a proper response from a CA ( and the responses you show do not appear to be complete validation) and you have sent the follow up disputes to the CRAs and not obtained a deletion, then you can file a CFPB complaint against the CA.

[HoustonLynne]

Are you sending your mail to the CAs certified ONLY without a return receipt or proof of delivery requested?? Yes, all mail to CAs has been sent via CM only -- no return receipt requested.

 

A CA can NOT respond that your inquiry is "frivolous" that IS the prerogative of the CRAs.

 

Any mail that requires a signature is NOT forwarded, which is why it is important to send all mail certified only.

 

If you have not received a proper response from a CA ( and the responses you show do not appear to be complete validation) and you have sent the follow up disputes to the CRAs and not obtained a deletion, then you can file a CFPB complaint against the CA. Those responses were from my non-HIPAA attempts a year ago. So I should move forward with the medical DV to this same CA, now that they "verified" to EX...?

Hi Why Chat -- please see my responses above in blue.

 

I thought those responses from the CA a year ago didn't appear to provide enough info, so that was why I sent them a 2nd demand for validation, and they responded with the letter saying "we already validated, and now you're being classified as frivolous."

Please remember that this was all don't before I found your program. I started over fresh this year with all of the accounts, after not touching them for a year.

So should I go ahead and send the medical DV to the CA who sent those letters to us (in the links above) a year ago?

 

And should I re-send the DV to the CA who doesn't appear to have received the CM I sent -- the one that the USPS tracking system seems to have lost? That TL is the newest one, and it's on 2 CRAs.

 

Thank you so much.

[Why Chat]

OK,

On this one

 

And should I re-send the DV to the CA who doesn't appear to have received the CM I sent -- the one that the USPS tracking system seems to have lost? That TL is the newest one, and it's on 2 CRAs.

 

Send the follow up dispute. Use the tracking receipt stating that it was SENT to the address on the reports, it is presumed received even though the tracking system doesn't SEEM to say so. Remember, if the address was a PO box or "drop box" the PO will only be able to say received at station.

 

Hold off on anything else until you get a response on this one from the CRAs.

[HoustonLynne]

Will do -- I'll update here when I have new info. Thanks, Why Chat!