Hacker News Reader

Comment by Someone1234 | Hacker News Reader

Everything I said happened under the ACA. It was "only" $10K because of the ACA's out-of-pocket maximums.

A quick google suggests this is common:

> It's important to understand, however, that the out-of-network emergency room does not have a contract with your insurer, and is not obligated to accept their payment as payment in full. If the insurer pays less than the out-of-network emergency room bills, the emergency room can send you a balance bill for the difference, over and above the deductible and coinsurance amounts you pay.

View on HN

Balance billing is (far too slowly) moving towards being illegal: https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2019/state-efforts-pro...

You said

>Since then kid themselves also had an ambulance ride (seizure), and that too was "out of networking" in spite of being the only ambulance provider available within 15+ minutes.

That's the illegal part.

If you say so.

The $1,500+ ambulance bill still existed, I still paid it, and my kid wasn't even born until five+ years after the ACA came into force. The insurance company was "nice" enough to let me count it towards my kid's deductible for that year, but I paid every cent.

People will gladly collect money they aren't legally owed. In this case, unless there is more to the story, you shouldn't have paid it.

In normal countries you don't have that kind of criminogenic environment. Also, do stop the victim blaming.

>In normal countries you don't have that kind of criminogenic environment. Also, do stop the victim blaming.

Stop using "victim blaming" as a way to shut down discourse.

In every country in the world people run scams. Universal healthcare would make these particular kinds of scams a lot harder, but I guarantee you, you could still find this kind of anecdotal evidence of criminal behavior relating to healthcare.

I’ve had that experience too. What makes you think it’s illegal?

For emergency treatments, insurance companies are required by the ACA to pay the out of network provider, but charge you as if you are using an in network provider.

It's possible for the out of network provider to then bill separately from your insurance if they charge more than what your insurance pays out of network providers, but there's no way that's what happened here because $1500 after the out of network fee from the insurance company is far too high for an ambulance trip.

I see. Any parts of the law I can cite if I complain? At least in my case and OPs it doesn’t seem that the law is being followed in practice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com