
Facing sky-high medical bills? Your hospital may have overcharged you
The initial charge for the procedure at the University of Colorado Health Memorial Hospital Central was $104,000, his records show. Because Pfeifer had no insurance and would be paying out of pocket, he was quoted a discounted price of $58,124.
He said he called the hospital to get clarity on the bills but got nowhere. He began paying some of them and was pursued by a collection agency on others. Then he sought the help of a patient advocacy group.
'I've always paid my bills,' Pfeifer, 63, said. 'I wanted a little better explanation.'
The group he worked with, Patient Rights Advocate.org, found that some of his charges were far higher than the amounts UCHealth reported under a federal price transparency rule that went into effect in 2021. And that wasn't the only notable finding: Only 25% of Pfeifer's charges showed up on the hospital's required price list and therefore could not be compared at all.
Pfeifer's experience is not uncommon, according to patient advocates, public interest lawyers and Medicare data.
The burden of medical debt, a problem faced by 100 million Americans, has pushed many to delay medical care and even file for bankruptcy, research shows. Making these obligations even more ruinous, patient advocates say, is that many may be based on inaccurate health care bills. These discrepancies occur even as hospitals must list prices for care on their websites.
The price transparency rule, initiated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, requires facilities to 'establish, update, and make public a list of all standard charges for all items and services.' Implemented under the first Trump administration, it aims to help consumers shop for care and compare prices before they go to the hospital.
Now, four years after the rule went into effect, hospital billing seems 'intentionally complex,' said Cynthia Fisher, founder of Patient Rights Advocate.org.
'Hospitals and insurance companies alike have even hired many middle-player firms to be able to maximize their margins and profits at every single patient encounter,' she added. 'Sometimes what we're finding is the charges like Blake's that are billed are far beyond even the highest rate that they have within their hospital pricing file.'
It adds up to an increasingly costly health care experience for Americans. A West Health-Gallup survey published April 2 found that 35% of respondents said they could not access high-quality, affordable health care — a new high since 2021.
$99 for an $8 blood test
UCHealth is a nonprofit hospital system with 14 hospitals in Colorado, southern Wyoming and western Nebraska. In its financial filings, UCHealth says its discount program for self-pay patients like Pfeifer 'reduces uninsured patients' liabilities to a level more equivalent of insured patients.'
Some of Pfeifer's records conflict with this description.
Pfeifer received 10 common blood tests, known as a metabolic panel, and was billed $104 for each. By comparison, UCHealth's public price data shows it charged insured patients between $6.52 and $52.89 for each test in 2022.
In another case, Pfeifer was charged $99 for a blood culture to measure bacteria, the records show, while UCHealth's pricing data listed a range of charges for insured patients of between $8 and $61. For a phosphate level blood test, Pfeifer was billed $30, while insured patients at UCHealth were charged between $3.72 and $22.02.
Under Colorado law, violations of hospital price transparency requirements are a deceptive trade practice.
Dan Weaver, a UCHealth spokesman, said in a statement that the health system 'does everything possible to share prices and estimates with our patients, encourage insurance coverage, assist patients in applying for Medicaid and other programs that may offer coverage.'
Regarding Pfeifer's case, Weaver said he could not comment because the hospital had received notice from a lawyer representing Pfeifer that he may file a claim against it. He said the hospital disputes what is in the lawyer's notice, but he declined to specify what exactly it disputes.
Weaver pointed to the state of Colorado 's 2024 report stating that UCHealth hospitals 'are fully compliant with transparency requirements.' For 2022, when Pfeifer received care at UCHealth, the document showed the hospital providing his care received a 'fair' transparency rating by the state, above 'poor' but below 'good.'
Weaver added that CMS, which determines hospital compliance with transparency requirements, 'has not cited UCHealth or our hospitals for noncompliance.'
Enforcement actions are exceedingly rare. CMS' website lists monetary penalties against only 27 hospitals in the four years since the requirements began. (There are 6,000 hospitals nationwide, according to the American Hospital Association.)
A December 2024 report from the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General found that nearly 40% of the 100 hospitals it studied were not complying with the price transparency requirements.
Colorado law allows patients to sue a hospital bringing a debt collection proceeding against them when they believe the facilities have violated price transparency requirements. Steve Woodrow, a Democratic member of the Colorado House of Representatives and a lawyer at the firm Edelson in Denver, represents Pfeifer.
'What happened to Mr. Pfeifer unfortunately repeats itself and plays out across the country thousands of times every year,' Woodrow told NBC News in an interview. 'We now have a situation where people are afraid to get medical care because of the financial ramifications.'
'A power imbalance'
Last November, the Justice Department alleged that UCHealth had overbilled Medicare and TRICARE, the health insurer for U.S. service members and their families. Between November 2017 and March 31, 2021, the government alleged, providers at UCHealth hospitals submitted inflated Medicare and TRICARE claims for 'frequent monitoring of vital signs' among patients in the emergency department.
UCHealth agreed to pay $23 million to settle the allegations without an admission of liability.
Weaver, the UCHealth spokesperson, said the hospital system settled to prevent a lengthy and costly legal dispute.
'UCHealth firmly denies these allegations,' he added, 'and maintains that its billing practices align with the guidelines set forth by the American College of Emergency Physicians.'
While UCHealth is a nonprofit, it has generated rising revenues and earnings recently. Net patient revenues at UCHealth, its securities filings show, totaled $8 billion in fiscal 2024, 17% higher than the previous year. Operating income was $523 million, an increase of 58% over 2023.
UCHealth's charges for care are higher than most other nonprofits', Medicare data shows. In fiscal 2022, the most recent figures available, UCHealth charged patients 6.6 times the hospital system's costs for care. That is far higher than the 4 times, on average, that U.S. nonprofit health systems charged for care that year, according to Ge Bai, a professor of health policy and management at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Weaver, of UCHealth, said the hospital system's charges are competitive with others. 'Last year alone, UCHealth provided $1.3 billion in total community benefits including about $570 million in uncompensated care,' his statement said.
It's problem enough for patients who are overcharged or billed incorrectly for health care. But when hospitals sue to receive payment for those bills, such lawsuits often result in default judgments, legal experts say, issued to patients who don't appear in court or respond. Default judgments can have dire consequences, including wage garnishments.
UCHealth has sued thousands of patients using third parties or debt collection middlemen in recent years, a practice that is examined in new research by academics at the George Washington University Law School, Stanford University's Center for Clinical Research and Fisher's group.
The study, ' Hospitals Suing Patients: The Rise of Stealth Intermediaries,' found UCHealth and one debt collection firm brought 12,722 lawsuits against patients from 2019 to 2023. Legal records analyzed by the authors suggested 'many of the collection efforts were based on unsubstantiated and inaccurate billing records.'
The use of legal middlemen is a national trend and allows hospitals to hide their involvement, avoiding the bad publicity these lawsuits can bring, the research contends. Last year, Colorado lawmakers enacted legislation barring hospitals from suing patients under debt collectors' names, after an investigation into the practice by 9News, an NBC affiliate, and The Colorado Sun.
Barak Richman is the Alexander Hamilton professor of business law at George Washington Law School and a co-author of the study.
'What this research shows is people are being pulled into court where a power imbalance takes advantage of them,' he said. 'There needs to be a lot of deliberative thought into what to do about courts as it relates to medical debt.'
In a statement about the study, UCHealth's Weaver said those suits make up a 'tiny fraction of our patient care — in fact, more than 99.93% of all patient accounts are resolved without a lawsuit.'
He added: 'This study, based on older data, does not reflect the changes put in place in recent years to minimize billing errors, ensure patients are aware of our financial assistance options, and are well informed of their medical bills.'
'A principle thing'
Damon Carson, a small-business owner in Longmont, Colorado, was sued by a collection company after he received an outpatient endoscopy at a UCHealth hospital in his town. The suit came while he was disputing the hospital's charges as excessive.
A self-pay patient along with his wife, Traci, Carson tried to be a savvy shopper before he went in for the procedure in 2021. He asked for price estimates from several providers, and the nearby UCHealth facility provided one totaling $1,448, according to a court document. Carson paid upfront.
'I had the procedure and everything was fine,' Carson told NBC News. 'Then the bills started rolling in.'
Additional charges of $4,742 drove the total cost for the procedure to around $6,200, a court document shows.
Carson said that when he questioned the bills, noting the far lower original estimate, the hospital told him the add-on costs reflected the removal of growths found inside him during surgery.
A UCHealth spokesman said the original estimate for Carson's care was accurate and that he was told there might be additional charges and signed an acknowledgement of that, which the hospital provided to NBC News. (Carson says he recalls no discussion of the potential for additional charges.)
When Carson refused to pay, he was sued by Collection Center Inc., a debt collection firm that has often filed lawsuits against patients on behalf of the hospital, the academic study shows. In 2023, Carson and the collection firm conducted a mediation, according to court documents. Carson wound up paying only one-third of the additional charges to settle the case.
'I was surprised they caved that fast,' Carson told NBC News. 'Traci and I could easily have paid the $4,000 and our lives gone on. But this was a principle thing.'
Fisher, the patient advocate, said the outcome of Carson's case is revealing. 'No one should ever pay that first bill,' she said. 'The onus of proof needs to be on the hospital and the insurance company to prove that they have not overcharged us.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
10 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Mass poisoning. Mind control. And weather tampering. The TRUTH about 'chemtrails'
The white lines seen following airplanes as they fly could be full of harmful chemicals that are toxic in Americans' health, some people claim. The streaks left across the sky from planes, called contrails, are formed by water vapor from the plane's exhaust freezing in the cold air at high altitudes. Your browser does not support iframes.


The Independent
21 hours ago
- The Independent
You can now give yourself an at-home flu vaccine
For the first time, Americans can get their seasonal flu vaccine at home. Starting Friday, eligible adults in 34 states can order the FluMist Home - a nasal spray - online ahead of the upcoming flu season, European drugmaker AstraZeneca announced, calling it a 'transformational moment in the evolution of influenza protection.' FluMist was previously only available at pharmacies or doctors' offices. Now, interested people can go to to order the sprays, potentially saving time spent at a clinic or drug store. Once received, the vaccine should be stored in the refrigerator until it is used. Then, people between the ages of 18 and 49 years old can self-administer the vaccine. FluMist Home can be given to children and teens between the ages of two and 17 years old. A full dose is one spray in each nostril. FluMist may not prevent infection in everyone who takes it, but it works similarly to vaccines for measles and chickenpox. It contains weakened versions of viruses that trigger the immune system in the nose and throat, teaching it to build up immunity without causing infection. In rare cases, FluMist may cause serious side effects, including allergic reactions. But the most common side effects are a runny or stuffy nose, a sore throat and a fever of over 100 degrees. Some people should not take FluMist, including those with severe allergies to eggs, the vaccine's ingredients, or other flu vaccines, and kids who take aspirin or medicines containing aspirin. Children should also not take aspirin for four weeks after they get FluMist, unless told to do so by a healthcare provider. The spray, which was initially approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2003 and was approved for at-home use without a healthcare professional last September, should be free for people with insurance, though there is an $8.99 shipping and processing fee. AstraZeneca said it hopes that all of the lower 48 states will have access to the spray in future flu seasons, although when that may be is unclear. The announcement comes on the heels of the worst flu season in 15 years, fueled by a cold winter, the spread of H5N1 bird flu, Covid, and other respiratory illnesses, and declining vaccine rates. Falling vaccination was 'a major cause of the surge,' Dr. Elizabeth Mack, the head of the pediatric critical care unit at the Medical University of South Carolina's Children's Health, told National Geographic. 'As influenza vaccination rates decline, especially among younger populations, this first-of-its-kind, at-home, needle-free option offers a critical opportunity to help make protection more accessible, convenient, and better aligned with the realities and current preferences of people's lives,' Dr. Ravi Jhaveri, the division head of infectious diseases at Northwestern University School of Medicine, said of FluMist Home, in a statement shared by AstraZeneca.


Daily Mirror
2 days ago
- Daily Mirror
Mounjaro weight loss drug price to surge by 170% for Brits - except for ONE customer
Eli Lilly is increasing the UK price of its weight-loss drug Mounjaro Eli Lilly is set to significantly hike the UK price of its weight-loss and diabetes medication Mounjaro, with some dosages expected to see a staggering 170 percent increase starting from September. The pharmaceutical giant has justified the price surge as an effort to "address pricing inconsistencies compared with other developed countries, including in Europe" and to ensure equitable global contributions towards funding medical research. The sharpest rise will affect the month's supply of the drug's highest doses, which will soar from £122 to £330. Smaller doses will experience increases ranging from 45 to 138 percent. It comes after a man, 30, puts shoulder pain down to gym aches, then doctors ask where he'd like to die. Despite these changes, Lilly has assured that the NHS will not be affected by the new list prices, pledging to maintain the current rates to preserve uninterrupted patient access. Private healthcare providers, who also offer the medication, will face the new prices but have the option to negotiate confidential discounts directly with Eli Lilly. This development occurs amidst political debates in the US, where ex-president Donald Trump has lambasted what he deems "foreign freeloaders" for enjoying lower pharmaceutical costs while Americans bear much higher expenses. In one address, he highlighted obesity treatments, recounting how a friend in London acquired the "fat shot drug" at a fraction of the US cost, reports the Daily Record. Research from the Rand Corporation indicates that drug prices in the US are typically almost triple those in several other advanced nations. The pharmaceutical sector has been mobilising to combat the potential danger of a "most favoured nation" strategy, which could tie American pricing to international rates. Lilly highlighted that the UK was amongst the earliest markets to receive Mounjaro and emphasised that its initial focus had been on delivering the medication to diabetic patients swiftly. "At launch, Lilly agreed to a UK list price that is significantly below the European average to prevent delays in NHS changes in the environment and new clinical evidence supporting the value of Mounjaro, we are now aligning the list price more consistently to ensure fair global contributions to the cost of innovation," the firm stated. Talks between pharmaceutical companies and the UK Government regarding NHS drug costs have grown increasingly fraught, with deliberations about modifications to a clawback levy on pharmaceutical sales extending well beyond agreed timelines. The Government's latest proposals featured plans to increase spending on medications, though industry chiefs voiced exasperation over the absence of specifics or clarity regarding whether this would involve purchasing additional medicines or paying elevated prices for current treatments. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has endorsed Mounjaro for as many as 3.4 million individuals across England. Nevertheless, worries about cost-effectiveness resulted in an arrangement for a staged introduction, beginning with approximately 250,000 patients presenting the most urgent clinical requirements during the initial three years. NHS England has assured that the forthcoming price alterations will not impact the provision of the medication to qualified patients suffering from obesity or diabetes. "Mounjaro is a cost-effective and valuable tool to support people to reach a healthier weight and the wider health and lifestyle benefits that offers," NHS England stated. The adjustments bring the UK's pricing more in line with the European mean, occurring amidst a period when drug manufacturers are acutely aware of how varying international prices might influence upcoming policy choices in the US.