A couple of examples recently where consultants who have tried to base their fees on the best rate available.
Take the consultant who realises that PMI company Num 1 pay £300 for a procedure whereas PMI company 2 pay £400.
He decrees he will charge PMI Company 1 the PMI Company 2 rate.
Great idea.
Right up to the point PMI company 1 receives the invoice for the higher amount.
Trouble
They will decline to pay that fee.
Most likely they will shortfall it.
But, replies the Consultant, no problem.
The patient is ultimately liable for any shortfall.
I know of one consultant who even puts on his website “we use PMI Company 2 rates to calculate our fees and therefore there may be a shortfall which you will have to pay”
Fee Assured
Yes, the patient is liable for a shortfall BUT not when the consultant is fee assured he isn’t.
Most likely a letter addressed to the Consultant will arrive sooner or later from PMI Company 1 pointing out that such “inappropriate billing” is not acceptable.
Carry on doing it and recognition is at risk.
It’s incredibly similar to unbundling.
Continue doing it over a number of months and for sure eyebrows will be raised.
Even if there is no “fee assured” status PMI Company 1 will be well aware of regular and consistent charges that are in excess of their published fee schedule.
Notwithstanding the above, of course, consultants want the best possible fee for a procedure but attempting to obtain the same by “inappropriate billing” is not the smartest way to go about it.
pete@medicalhealthcaremanagement.co.uk