NC Commissioner fined UnitedHealthcare $3.4M for unfair billing practices against patients
RALEIGH, N.C. (WNCN) — UnitedHealthcare of North Carolina is facing allegations from the state that they violated regulations behind billing their patients.
In an investigation that took four years to build, North Carolina Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey fined the healthcare provider $3.4 million Friday claiming the company incorrectly handled balance billing.
Balance billing is when health insurance providers bill a patient the difference between the amount they charge and the amount the insurance approves for the patient in their healthcare plan.
In this case, Commissioner Causey said in his investigation he found multiple instances where UnitedHealthcare of NC did not follow its own procedures to negotiate with non-contracted facilities and providers for anesthesia services and emergency room services — footing members with the leftover balance.
Judge temporarily blocks Musk, DOGE from accessing Treasury Department payment systems
'Patients receiving emergency room services certainly don't have the time or capacity to go through a checklist and make sure all providers attending them are in-network,' Commissioner Causey said. 'UnitedHealthcare's practices potentially put unnecessary financial burdens on many North Carolinians. I am happy to see that UnitedHealthcare has agreed to take corrective action.'
Members of UnitedHealthcare of NC filed complaints to the state's insurance department, and in their investigation, the state said their review found that members were subjected to cost sharing more than applicable deductible, copayment and coinsurance liabilities.
Hospitals struggling with longer wait times, surge in patients during bad flu season
In addition to paying the multi-million dollar fine, Commissioner Causey said UnitedHealthcare of NC agreed to provide the Department of Insurance with a corrective action plan to confront violations found in the investigation and submit to future compliance examinations.
Commissioner Causey said the $3.4 million fine will be distributed for the benefit of the public schools, as required under Article IX, Section 7 of the North Carolina Constitution.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Expecting parents are expecting the worst with UAB and UnitedHealthcare negotiations
BIRMINGHAM, Ala (WIAT) – UAB facilities across Alabama could become out-of-network for the thousands of Alabamians insured by UnitedHealthcare. 'Obviously, the hope is they find an agreement and I don't have to swap providers,' Christian Holly said. Holly and his wife are getting ready to welcome their first child into the world. Their due date is in October and their doctors are at UAB. 'My wife was big on using UAB,' Holly said. 'They've got the best trauma center, the best neo-natal care, all of those sorts of things.' UAB and UnitedHealthCare (UHC) have until July 31 to finalize an agreement. Each party sent out statements that read in part: 'We are deeply disappointed that UnitedHealthcare has created this uncertainty for our patients…UAB Hospital alone provides more than $100 million a year in care for which it is not paid; and United reimburses care providers less than other insurers.' – UAB Statement. 'UAB continues to drive up health care costs for people and businesses throughout Alabama through its acquisitions…Our goal is to reach an agreement that is affordable for consumers and employers while providing continued, uninterrupted network access to UAB.' – UHC Statement. The two parties have seven weeks to make that happen. 'If this doesn't get squared away in the next month, we'll have to swap providers,' Holly said. If UAB becomes out-network for the Holly's, they have two options: pay out of pocket or find a new doctor to deliver their first born. But it's possible both could happen. In the chance his wife needs emergency medical attention during delivery, or their child needs emergency medical care – they'll have to go to UAB and pay out of pocket. 'If she does have an issue, they'll have to swap her to UAB so it just adds a lot of worry to everything,' Holly said. CBS 42 News requested the total number of Alabamians who are insured through UHC. As of Thursday, we were still waiting for that number. However, thousands of retired public school teachers and their dependents are insured through UHC. 'We have about 80,000 lives that are covered currently through PHIP United Plan,' The Government Media Relations Manger for the Alabama Education Association, Allison King said. Anyone who worked for the Alabama Public School system for at least 25 years qualifies for Public Education Employees' Health Insurance Plan King said. That plan provides those state retirees with UHC. 'We'll certainly be working to advocate on the behalf of our retirees and make sure they have quality programs both in service providers and health care options,' King said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Los Angeles Times
10 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Have job-based health coverage at 65? You may still want to sign up for Medicare
When Alyne Diamond fell off a horse in August 2023 and broke her back, her employer-based health plan through UnitedHealthcare paid for her emergency care in Aspen, Colo. It also covered related pain management and physical therapy after she returned home to New York City. The bills totaled more than $100,000. The real estate lawyer, now 67, was eligible for Medicare at the time but hadn't enrolled. Since she was still working, she thought her employer health insurance plan would cover her. That misunderstanding has had financial repercussions that she continues to deal with today. More than a year after her riding accident, Diamond was back at the emergency room after she tripped on a step while entering a New York restaurant. Her face covered in blood, Diamond was examined by staff, who did multiple CT scans. The bill for that care: $12,000. This time, though, the insurance coverage wasn't routine. Nearly all her claims were denied. Diamond was caught in a fairly common coverage snag: People who have group health insurance when they become eligible for Medicare sometimes find themselves on the hook for their medical bills because their group plan stops paying. Diamond contacted several people at UnitedHealthcare before she found out why the insurer refused to pay her claims. When Diamond turned 65 in 2022, Medicare — unbeknownst to her — became the 'primary payer' for her claims, meaning the federal health program for older or disabled people was supposed to take the lead in covering her medical bills, before other insurers paid anything. (As secondary payer, Diamond's employer policy picked up 20% of what Medicare would have paid.) Had she signed up for the government insurance plan when she turned 65, Diamond could have avoided a financially perilous situation that left her unexpectedly responsible for the medical costs she incurred during that time. She began to understand what had happened as she made inquiries about the denied claims. Diamond said she was told that UnitedHealthcare audited her claims last year and determined it had been improperly paying for her care, perhaps because her pricey medical claims after her fall from the horse raised a red flag. The insurer not only stopped paying current claims but also moved to claw back tens of thousands of dollars it had paid to providers in the two years since she turned 65. Some of those providers are now seeking payment from her. 'It's horrifying,' she said. 'For about two months I was devastated. I thought, 'Where am I going to get the money to pay all these people? There goes my retirement.'' The mistake has already cost her $25,000 and may cost her much more if providers continue to bill her for amounts that UnitedHealthcare has clawed back for care she received before signing up for Medicare in February. A UnitedHealthcare spokesperson declined to provide an on-the-record statement, citing safety concerns. Patient advocates say they frequently hear from people who, like Diamond, thought they didn't need to sign up for Medicare upon turning 65 because they had group health coverage. That assumption is generally correct if they or their spouse is working at a company with at least 20 employees. In that case, employer coverage is considered primary and they can delay signing up for Medicare as long as they or their spouse continues to be employed there. But if someone has employer coverage through a company with fewer than 20 workers, Medicare generally becomes the primary payer when they turn 65. The real estate law firm at which Diamond is a partner has a handful of employees. Similarly, if someone is older than 65 and has retiree health coverage or has left their job and opted to continue their employer coverage under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, also known as COBRA, Medicare pays first. The issue can also arise for people who are younger than 65 if they are eligible for Medicare because of a disability. In those instances, Medicare pays first if they or their family member works at a company with fewer than 100 employees. If people in these groups don't sign up for Medicare when they become eligible, they can find themselves responsible for all their medical bills for years. (They may also owe a penalty for late enrollment in the Medicare program.) 'It's very alarming and there's no current fix to the situation,' said Fred Riccardi, president of the New York-based Medicare Rights Center, a national patient advocacy organization. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services did not respond to a request for comment. Mark Scherzer, a lawyer in Germantown, N.Y., who helps people with insurance problems, and who advised Diamond, said he gets calls a couple of times a month from people who face this issue. 'What I see constantly now is that insurers go back and they claw back the money from the doctor and the doctor then claws the money back from the patient,' he said. Costly claims may trigger an insurer to examine someone's coverage. Those big claims 'seem to get on the insurer's radar,' said Casey Schwarz, senior counsel for education and federal policy at the Medicare Rights Center. UnitedHealthcare has recouped over $50,000 in medical bills from some of the providers who treated Diamond in New York after her riding accident. She's paid them about $25,000 so far. Some have agreed to let her pay the amount Medicare would have paid. But there may be more bills to come. Under New York law, health plans have two years after claims are paid to claw back payments from providers, and providers have three years to sue patients for medical debt. So, while there is still time for Diamond to be billed, the clock will eventually run out. Diamond plans to sue the broker who manages her company's health plan and other benefits for negligence. 'The Medicare secondary payment rules basically say that if you didn't sign up because you didn't know Medicare was supposed to be primary, that's on you,' said Melanie Lambert, senior Medicare advocate at the Center for Medicare Advocacy in Connecticut. Lambert said she has seen the issue 'many, many times.' In some instances, if a beneficiary can demonstrate they were misled by an employer or a federal employee, they may qualify for relief or a special enrollment period, she said. In a 2023 letter to the acting secretary of the Department of Labor, the National Assn. of Insurance Commissioners advocated applying a 'commonsense rule to COBRA plans, individual health insurance, and other coverage sources: those entitled to Medicare Part B but not enrolled in it should not lose benefits they pay for from a non-Medicare coverage source.' The Department of Labor didn't respond to a request for comment. In earlier times, people started collecting Social Security benefits then automatically got Medicare when they turned 65. Now, enrolling in Medicare is more complicated for many people, said Tricia Neuman, a senior vice president and the executive director of the Program on Medicare Policy at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. 'As more people are delaying going on Social Security and delaying going on Medicare, there's more opportunities for people to make mistakes, and those mistakes are costly,' Neuman said. Coverage experts say there are no clear requirements for insurers, employers or the federal government to notify people about how the payment rules governing coordination of benefits between health plans may change when they become eligible for Medicare. The information appears in a chart in the government's 'Medicare & You' handbook, if someone knows to look for it. But it is not easy to find. A straightforward fix could solve many of the problems people face in this area, Scherzer said. Since every health plan knows its enrollees' ages, why not require them to notify people approaching 65 of possible benefit coordination issues with Medicare? 'It's so simple and such a no-brainer.' Andrews writes for KFF Health News a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.
Yahoo
21 hours ago
- Yahoo
Three R.I. health insurers pay over $1 million in fines for lapses in COVID coverage
Three Rhode Island health insurers were fined for charging patients out-of-pocket costs for pandemic-related care, such as emergency room care, doctor visits, and hospital stays, that should have been fully covered, the Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner said. (Getty image) UnitedHealthcare paid $1 million and two Rhode Island health insurers paid lesser fines for violating state rules for health coverage of COVID-19 services. Health Insurance Commissioner Cory King announced Thursday that his office had finished collecting fines charged to UnitedHealthcare, Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island (BCBSRI) and Aetna. The insurers were penalized for charging patients out-of-pocket costs for pandemic-related care, such as emergency room care, doctor visits, and hospital stays — services that should have been fully covered under a 2021 rule promulgated by Patrick Tigue, King's predecessor in the the Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner (OHIC). UnitedHealthcare incurred the heaviest fine while Blue Cross and Aetna were fined $20,000 and $10,000, respectively. Consent decrees for the insurance companies stipulated payment was due for UnitedHealthcare and Aetna on June 2, while Blue Cross needed to pay up by June 6. King said Thursday that the final payment was made last week. 'OHIC expects health insurance companies to comply with the law,' King wrote in an email. 'When they do not, they must take corrective actions and face consequences.' The fines accumulated from July 3, 2021, when the rule was formalized into general law, through May 11, 2023, when Rhode Island's cost waiver rule expired and the COVID-19 public health emergency officially ended. The cost waiver, however, only applied to fully insured plans, or coverage plans purchased by employers in which the insurer assumes the financial responsibility and risk. The cost mandate did not apply to people receiving services under self-insured plans — the kind of coverage often purchased by larger companies and held by about 60% of covered Rhode Islanders. The three consent decrees OHIC released Thursday detail the scope of violations and how the insurers fixed their billing problems. UnitedHealthcare's hefty $1 million fine derived from 1,545 claims in which Rhode Island plan members were wrongly charged for COVID-related care. In 2023, the company reprocessed the claims and refunded roughly $270,000 to affected members. 'We are pleased to have resolved this issue with the Rhode Island Office of the Health Insurance Commissioner,' Bradley J. Alexander, a spokesperson for United, said in an email Thursday. 'We remain focused on helping individuals access care while supporting our employees, our network of care providers, our clients and the communities we serve.' The Blue Cross case was less straightforward. The insurer had already waived cost-sharing for COVID treatment in April 2020, according to spokesperson Rich Salit. 'BCBSRI's cost-share waiver applied to all in-network services and out-of-network services received outside of Rhode Island,' Salit wrote. 'For services in Rhode Island, BCBSRI was encouraging members to seek care from our broad network, as members going out-of-network could still be exposed to provider balance billing.' Balance billing is when out-of-network providers charge patients for what insurance didn't pay. According to the consent decree, Blue Cross believed its policy complied with the OHIC statute, at first indicating 'that it was not waiving cost sharing on services related to the treatment of COVID-19 if such services were provided by out-of-network providers within Rhode Island.' Nevertheless, OHIC did not agree with that interpretation, penalized the company for not covering the out-of-network care in 19 claims. Blue Cross was required to pay $1,751.60 in refunds, plus the $20,000 fine. Salit said the claims came from eight plan members. 'BCBSRI agreed to reimburse the cost sharing those members incurred and updated its policy, and the matter was resolved,' Salit wrote. Aetna, a subsidiary of CVS, only had three claims flagged under the OHIC rule. 'We are pleased this agreement resolves issues with the OHIC related to three (3) Aetna claims, which we reprocessed in 2022,' Phillip J. Blando, an Aetna spokesperson, wrote via email. The penalty money goes into the state's general fund, according to OHIC. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
