They were not still trying to come after you. Almost every hospital will send you a copy of the bill. That isn't an attempt at collections, that is simply standard operating procedure.
This I know. However, they were definitely trying to come after me. They didn't send me just one bill. They kept sending and sending and sending. It clearly stated there was an unpaid balance, and that I owed them hundreds of dollars. They even called me once, and offered financing solutions. When I did a free credit report back in '05 one of the agencies listed an unpaid debt with the hospital. That doesn't show up anymore, though.
That is the time you should contact your insurance and find out if they paid it or not. Until the insurance pays it (and sometimes they are late in paying it or only cover certain parts of it), then you are responsible. As such, you should have contacted the insurance company and found out the status of their payment.
That is the time you should contact your insurance and find out if they paid it or not. Until the insurance pays it (and sometimes they are late in paying it or only cover certain parts of it), then you are responsible. As such, you should have contacted the insurance company and found out the status of their payment.
I did, they said they paid. I told them the hospital was sending me bills. They said they paid, and we received papers from them confirming as such. I sent copies of those papers to the hospital, but they kept sending me bills. Thus, I gave them the finger.
Insurance companies are not in the business of paying people. Thus, they aren't the most proactive in making sure they cover all of your expenses. SOP.
And what Mrs. MacRoss said is right: you are technically responsible even if your insurance is screwing you over. Welcome to the American Medical System.
And what Mrs. MacRoss said is right: you are technically responsible even if your insurance is screwing you over. Welcome to the American Medical System.
We pay 13% tax on purchases and give half of our income to the government. Welcome to the Canadian Medical System.
And what Mrs. MacRoss said is right: you are technically responsible even if your insurance is screwing you over. Welcome to the American Medical System.
We pay 13% tax on purchases and give half of our income to the government. Welcome to the Canadian Medical System.
Yes, but if you get cancer, you still can get coverage. If you're ill in the US, no insurance company will touch you. If they do, they'll charge you ludicrous premiums that will easily add up to more than half your income.
And what Mrs. MacRoss said is right: you are technically responsible even if your insurance is screwing you over. Welcome to the American Medical System.
We pay 13% tax on purchases and give half of our income to the government. Welcome to the Canadian Medical System.
Yes, but if you get cancer, you still can get coverage. If you're ill in the US, no insurance company will touch you. If they do, they'll charge you ludicrous premiums that will easily add up to more than half your income.
Yeah, we don't actually have it too bad. It's a waste for those fortunate enough to be healthy all their lives, but I've already taken enough out of the healthcare system to get my money's worth of coverage.
And what Mrs. MacRoss said is right: you are technically responsible even if your insurance is screwing you over. Welcome to the American Medical System.
We pay 13% tax on purchases and give half of our income to the government. Welcome to the Canadian Medical System.
Yes, but if you get cancer, you still can get coverage. If you're ill in the US, no insurance company will touch you. If they do, they'll charge you ludicrous premiums that will easily add up to more than half your income.
Yeah, we don't actually have it too bad. It's a waste for those fortunate enough to be healthy all their lives, but I've already taken enough out of the healthcare system to get my money's worth of coverage.
I would happily pay higher taxes to ensure that I have good health care, good education system (including higher education), good roads, etc. You get what you pay for. If we can guarantee that the basics are taken care of (not only out of a desire to help those less fortunate, but for our own benefit as well) then there is a guaranteed left-over amount of cash to spend as I wish. Should I ever loose some of my income or get cancer again, I will still be in a tight spot, but I wouldn't be desperate. I don't get why most people see social programs as compulsory charity, but rather a self-interested move. It guarantees that if there is a turn for the worse in their life, that there is a safety net. Nothing in life is certain, and it would be nice to know that no matter what disaster befalls, that you and yours can survive.
I don't get why most people see social programs as compulsory charity, but rather a self-interested move. It guarantees that if there is a turn for the worse in their life, that there is a safety net. Nothing in life is certain, and it would be nice to know that no matter what disaster befalls, that you and yours can survive.
This is in large part due to optimism bias. People who think this way discount the possibility they will need these safety nets themselves, so they see it as subsidizing benefits for other people.
This is in large part due tooptimism bias. People who think this way discount the possibility they will need these safety nets themselves, so they see it as subsidizing benefits for other people.
That is one aspect of it, but there is another that I think is the key.
Take for example the metaphor of the Go-Kart. Most Go-Karts you drive in the US are setup in such a way that if you floor the throttle, and ignore the brake, then you will still be able to easily make it around every corner just by turning the wheel. This safety net results in people driving crazily, carelessly, and dangerously. If given real go-karts, people are forced to actually pay attention and drive carefully. When serious failure is a very real possibility, people begin to take what they are doing very seriously. When too many safeties are in place, people become careless because the worst that can happen is not so bad.
Some people in this world are motivated by being given great things to reach for. As long as society does not put ceilings in place, those people will have their motivation. Some people are motivated by having a fire under their ass. When you put too many safety nets in place, the people who are motivated by ass-fire will lean on those nets as much as they can. They have no ambition to get off the net and climb. They're comfortable as long as they don't get burned.
At the same time, there are some people who legitimately fall on hard times, and do deserve a safety net. Without a safety, these people would fall to the floor, and never be able to get up again. If caught, these people would get off the net right quick and get back to climbing.
Socialist leaning people seem to look around and only see single parents working four jobs. That is why they, rightfully, fight for these safety nets. That's exactly the kind of person who will take off and become awesome if given a helpful boost. Free market leaning people look around and only see people not working, living in dilapidated houses, getting foods stamps, but also having swimming pools in the back yard and shiny SUVs in the driveway. They are outraged, and rightfully so. Why should society carry the extra weight of these lazy bums? We could be using that money to do something better, or simply lowering taxes.
So instead of having the same argument that has continue for centuries, instead think about the people the other side sees. Make sure whatever solution you come up with helps the single parents who get no sleep, but also kicks the lazy bums to the curb. You should realize that socialism and the free market have been at odds for so very long simply because there is no answer to this problem. If you come up with one, prepare for some Nobel prize type action.
Take for example the metaphor of the Go-Kart. Most Go-Karts you drive in the US are setup in such a way that if you floor the throttle, and ignore the brake, then you will still be able to easily make it around every corner just by turning the wheel. This safety net results in people driving crazily, carelessly, and dangerously. If given real go-karts, people are forced to actually pay attention and drive carefully. When serious failure is a very real possibility, people begin to take what they are doing very seriously. When too many safeties are in place, people become careless because the worst that can happen is not so bad.
By the same token, if you replace air bags with flamethrowers and spikes, there would never be another car accident caused by inattention, and no one would drive over 10 km/hr. Clearly, we need to replace safety devices with additional hazards, to make sure that no one ever voluntarily places their self in harm's way.
By the same token, if you replace air bags with flamethrowers and spikes, there would never be another car accident caused by inattention, and no one would drive over 10 km/hr. Clearly, we need to replace safety devices with additional hazards, to make sure that no one ever voluntarily places their self in harm's way.
Clearly, it's not a black and white argument, and clearly we can't use just analogies.
The "spikes and flamethrowers" are artificial consequences of failure. We use instruments like this already, in the form of legal disincentives. The average cost of speeding to an individual car driver is negligible, and the benefits are tangible. The government wishes to discourage speeding, and so increases the average cost by introducing artificial penalties (speeding tickets) for the activity.
We need to strike a balance between creating a reasonably secure environment and enforcing a reasonable level of personal responsibility. Safety nets and artificial disincentives are both valid tools to use in achieving this.
The problem now is that many people in the US perceive their level of security to be much higher than it actually is. They take massive risks, but are unable to deal with the consequences of failure. They need no-fault insurance because they can't be relied upon to be able to pay for damages they may cause. They need mortgage bailouts and foreclosure deferrals because they couldn't manage their own finances effectively. They lived lifestyles far above their means, and now are unable to deal with the consequences of said lifestyles.
We need a way to give people who legitimately need help a second-chance(unforeseen medical bills, disasters, unwilling unemployment) to overcome adversity, yet still demand that they behave like adults and assess the risks of their actions in a responsible manner.
Clearly, it's not a black and white argument, and clearly we can't use just analogies. [...]
This is a beautifully eloquent post, utterly trouncing my attempt at wit and sarcasm. I tip my hat to you, sir.
We need a way to give people who legitimately need help a second-chance(unforeseen medical bills, disasters, unwilling unemployment) to overcome adversity, yet still demand that they behave like adults and assess the risks of their actions in a responsible manner.
I agree wholeheartedly. If people can consistently demonstrate responsibility for their actions, there is no reason why society shouldn't help them overcome strife.
Why would someone ever give a line of credit to a foreigner if they don't have the power to collect on that debt across national borders?
Because half the time the Australian fucking government couldn't find their arse with both hands, a map, a mirror, and a fucking sherpa to lead the way. And that was before Kevin Rudd, who not only worse than that on his own, he drags other people down to his level, on top of basically letting the unions run the country.
Because half the time the Australian fucking government couldn't find their arse with both hands, a map, a mirror, and a fucking sherpa to lead the way. And that was before Kevin Rudd, who not only worse than that on his own, he drags other people down to his level, on top of basically letting the unions run the country.
Oh snap! I don't entirely agree, but I didn't vote for him.
Well, I've heard Rudd is at least an improvement, no matter how slight. Thoughts?
He used to be my local member, when he was the local member for mansfield - he did nothing, other than run more PR than a major Hollywood movie, and gun for the next stop on the ladder. He's done nothing in office, other than make a personal apology for something he didn't do, and tool about the world making PR stops. The last news I remember about him was that he talked on the phone to Obama.
John Howard - Well, let's face it, he made some very bad choices - but over all, he actually was quite a good Prime Minister. Most of the problems people have with him are bullshit - For example, the big deal everyone made about him saying "Sorry" - He did. All he refused to do was issue a Personal apology(You know, a "I am very sorry that I did this" sort of affair) Because He had no part in the stolen generation until after the fact. He apologized in every other way he could, But quite sensibly, He refused to personally apologize for something he did not personally do, and he was hauled over the coals for it.
Let's face it - he was treated like the Australia's version of Obama, and so far, he's been more like the y2K bug - There was Lots of talk about what's going to happen, but now that It's 12:30 Am, Nothing has or will happen, and we're all looking a bit silly.
If Howard was a boil, Kevin Rudd is a melanoma - As the PSA's go, you could say it's our national cancer.
I'll give you one thing - Senator Conroy and his ISP-level filtering plans will be a disaster, and may well drive me to vote for a third-party option next election. Almost makes me want to move to Victoria just so I could make him my lowest preference at the next senate election.
Just wanted to mention to anyone living in the East Coast of the U.S. that my firm has started a new practice field representing those that have been harassed by debt collectors. They are not representing debtors in attempts to negotiate lower debt, they are merely using Federal and State statues to recover damages for those harassed (whether a debtor or not). If you or someone you know is being hounded by collectors that are violating the F.D.C.P.A., please feel free to PM me and I will be happy to provide you with the firm's information. Just a note, due to the nature of these cases all attorneys fees are provided by the violators, there would not be a fee to the clients directly.
Note: a lot of "hospitals" and "insurance companies" (debt collectors for them), get pretty close to violating HIPAA. Watch out for those guys; they'll give personal information away.
I actually had a small problem with my utilities company - I told the teller at my bank to cancel all my direct debits except for "Glide", but not seeing glide on my statement, she just canceled them all, and of course, they've not been getting paid. Contacted by a debit collection agency, and as soon as I found out what was going on, I sorted out the cash into the proper account with a transfer, and they said they wouldn't sue, and that the money would be taken out in a week, well after the transfer had cleared.
Received a letter a few weeks later, saying I was going to be sued if I didn't give them the cash in seven days - Though thanks to our highly efficient mail sorting system that we use in the house, by the time i got it, it was more like three days. So, I checked my bank, and surely enough, the money is gone, taken by Glide. That's right, boys and girls - They'd taken the money, and then with the issue sorted, proceeded to perform business as usual, which apparently doesn't include actually telling anybody that the debt is settled. So, I call them up, they confirm they have the money, apologize for the mistake. Yeah, all sweet, no worries then.
Until today, when I'm woken up by a bloke thumping on my door. I get up, curse, scratch myself, pull on my jeans, and still yawning, pad to the door in barefeet, to discover, to my surprise, two men in suits trying to serve me legal papers. After I figure out what's going on, I patiently explain the situation to them a few times, show them a printed copy of my bank statement from the few days before, and finally get them to bugger off without actually serving me.
I am having a problem with a debt collection agency. It started when they kept calling my house asking for Hector Djesus. I erased the messages because no one at my house has that name. Then yesterday I got a phone call with the same inquiry, I thought it was my dad calling from Peru so I answer ( I normally let the answer machine get any messages). It was a caller machine asking for Hector Djesus, so I waited for the options. I thought to myself maybe I can ask a costumer representative to tell them that a person with that name does not live in my house. However, the calling machine gave me and option: "push 4 if such a person does not live in the house", I of course pushed 4. Problem solved I thought. That very same day I received a letter for "Hector Djesus" stating that it has 30 days to pay 700 dollars for a service from Dish Network in Illinois. My family has never lived in Illinois, we live in VA. I thought to myself, "why is such a letter coming to my house? I will inquiry and let them know that such a person does not live in this address". I called them, and they didn't wanted to hear anything. They said that the public records show that the address for that person my house for the last 6 years. I was in awe, then they told me that they wanted to also talk with my Dad (whose name is also Hector). I told them that he was out of the country and that he would come the next day. The next day my dad called them, and they told him that they needed their SSN. He was reluctant to give them anything. And the end they just gave up and told them the he owe that money and that he needs to pay or they will report it and it will damage my dad's credit score. That is when my father became angry and told them that he had never had Dish Network (my family had Dish Network but it was under's my brother's name, and we cancel the service 2 years ago). He told them that he has never signed any contract with Dish Network and that he would consult with a lawyer. In response the representative told him that he will send him the paper work that they have within 30 days. In the mean time my brother will contact Dish Network to see what was the problem. There is the small chance that my brother just forgot to cancel the service but I doubt it since my mom remember that Dish Network came to pick up the receiver. We don't really care about the money we just don't want to pay for someone else mistake. This makes me really mad and I don't get mad very often
If it's already been sent to a collection agency, Dish Network can't do anything about it.
I'm pretty sure you have the right to demand that they provide evidence of the debt, and if they don't provide it and keep harassing you, there are legal routes you can take.
Contact a lawyer. Debt collection agencies very often violate the debt collection laws and get away with it because nobody challenges them on it.
I would also suggest calling a lawyer. I read an article about a guy in Texas who has a big debt. However, he studied the law regarding debt collection. He found out that all the debt collectors were breaking the law. He sued them, on his own, and got a lot of money. I'm willing to bet this is also a situation where you can actually make money if you get a laywer.
And the end they just gave up and told them the he owe that money and that he needs to pay or they will report it and it will damage my dad's credit score.
Uh...if that guy doesn't live at your house, and they only have his name, how are they going to report it as a problem on your dad's credit? They may keep harassing you, but if he never had an account with them in the first place, then there shouldn't be any way they can get it onto his credit. This would be a double problem for them. Not only are they harassing you about a debt, but it is a debt you don't even owe! That's not only harassment, but also fraud!
My roommate and I have taken to letting the answering machine pick up the first time we get a call. It says both of our names very clearly. Often, the people calling hang up and immediately call again. This is when we pick up the phone call, which is ALWAYS looking for someone who used to have this number but no longer does, and tersely explain to the person that the answering machine message said who lived here and that the person they are looking for no longer has this number, so take this number off the list RIGHT FUCKING NOW thankyouverymuch.
The person calling us immediately apologizes, flustered. We tried being nice about it, but we kept getting calls, so now we are being mean and letting them know that we mean business. The calls have reduced significantly.
I've noticed that the Do-Not-Call list has also significantly reduced all types of spam, fraudulent and all other BS calls from all of my phones. However, I do not know if the list applies to any phone number outside the U.S.
Comments
And what Mrs. MacRoss said is right: you are technically responsible even if your insurance is screwing you over. Welcome to the American Medical System.
Take for example the metaphor of the Go-Kart. Most Go-Karts you drive in the US are setup in such a way that if you floor the throttle, and ignore the brake, then you will still be able to easily make it around every corner just by turning the wheel. This safety net results in people driving crazily, carelessly, and dangerously. If given real go-karts, people are forced to actually pay attention and drive carefully. When serious failure is a very real possibility, people begin to take what they are doing very seriously. When too many safeties are in place, people become careless because the worst that can happen is not so bad.
Some people in this world are motivated by being given great things to reach for. As long as society does not put ceilings in place, those people will have their motivation. Some people are motivated by having a fire under their ass. When you put too many safety nets in place, the people who are motivated by ass-fire will lean on those nets as much as they can. They have no ambition to get off the net and climb. They're comfortable as long as they don't get burned.
At the same time, there are some people who legitimately fall on hard times, and do deserve a safety net. Without a safety, these people would fall to the floor, and never be able to get up again. If caught, these people would get off the net right quick and get back to climbing.
Socialist leaning people seem to look around and only see single parents working four jobs. That is why they, rightfully, fight for these safety nets. That's exactly the kind of person who will take off and become awesome if given a helpful boost. Free market leaning people look around and only see people not working, living in dilapidated houses, getting foods stamps, but also having swimming pools in the back yard and shiny SUVs in the driveway. They are outraged, and rightfully so. Why should society carry the extra weight of these lazy bums? We could be using that money to do something better, or simply lowering taxes.
So instead of having the same argument that has continue for centuries, instead think about the people the other side sees. Make sure whatever solution you come up with helps the single parents who get no sleep, but also kicks the lazy bums to the curb. You should realize that socialism and the free market have been at odds for so very long simply because there is no answer to this problem. If you come up with one, prepare for some Nobel prize type action.
The "spikes and flamethrowers" are artificial consequences of failure. We use instruments like this already, in the form of legal disincentives. The average cost of speeding to an individual car driver is negligible, and the benefits are tangible. The government wishes to discourage speeding, and so increases the average cost by introducing artificial penalties (speeding tickets) for the activity.
We need to strike a balance between creating a reasonably secure environment and enforcing a reasonable level of personal responsibility. Safety nets and artificial disincentives are both valid tools to use in achieving this.
The problem now is that many people in the US perceive their level of security to be much higher than it actually is. They take massive risks, but are unable to deal with the consequences of failure. They need no-fault insurance because they can't be relied upon to be able to pay for damages they may cause. They need mortgage bailouts and foreclosure deferrals because they couldn't manage their own finances effectively. They lived lifestyles far above their means, and now are unable to deal with the consequences of said lifestyles.
We need a way to give people who legitimately need help a second-chance(unforeseen medical bills, disasters, unwilling unemployment) to overcome adversity, yet still demand that they behave like adults and assess the risks of their actions in a responsible manner.
John Howard - Well, let's face it, he made some very bad choices - but over all, he actually was quite a good Prime Minister. Most of the problems people have with him are bullshit - For example, the big deal everyone made about him saying "Sorry" - He did. All he refused to do was issue a Personal apology(You know, a "I am very sorry that I did this" sort of affair) Because He had no part in the stolen generation until after the fact. He apologized in every other way he could, But quite sensibly, He refused to personally apologize for something he did not personally do, and he was hauled over the coals for it.
Let's face it - he was treated like the Australia's version of Obama, and so far, he's been more like the y2K bug - There was Lots of talk about what's going to happen, but now that It's 12:30 Am, Nothing has or will happen, and we're all looking a bit silly.
If you or someone you know is being hounded by collectors that are violating the F.D.C.P.A., please feel free to PM me and I will be happy to provide you with the firm's information. Just a note, due to the nature of these cases all attorneys fees are provided by the violators, there would not be a fee to the clients directly.
Received a letter a few weeks later, saying I was going to be sued if I didn't give them the cash in seven days - Though thanks to our highly efficient mail sorting system that we use in the house, by the time i got it, it was more like three days. So, I checked my bank, and surely enough, the money is gone, taken by Glide. That's right, boys and girls - They'd taken the money, and then with the issue sorted, proceeded to perform business as usual, which apparently doesn't include actually telling anybody that the debt is settled.
So, I call them up, they confirm they have the money, apologize for the mistake. Yeah, all sweet, no worries then.
Until today, when I'm woken up by a bloke thumping on my door. I get up, curse, scratch myself, pull on my jeans, and still yawning, pad to the door in barefeet, to discover, to my surprise, two men in suits trying to serve me legal papers. After I figure out what's going on, I patiently explain the situation to them a few times, show them a printed copy of my bank statement from the few days before, and finally get them to bugger off without actually serving me.
Seriously, WTF glide?
I thought to myself, "why is such a letter coming to my house? I will inquiry and let them know that such a person does not live in this address". I called them, and they didn't wanted to hear anything. They said that the public records show that the address for that person my house for the last 6 years. I was in awe, then they told me that they wanted to also talk with my Dad (whose name is also Hector). I told them that he was out of the country and that he would come the next day. The next day my dad called them, and they told him that they needed their SSN. He was reluctant to give them anything. And the end they just gave up and told them the he owe that money and that he needs to pay or they will report it and it will damage my dad's credit score.
That is when my father became angry and told them that he had never had Dish Network (my family had Dish Network but it was under's my brother's name, and we cancel the service 2 years ago). He told them that he has never signed any contract with Dish Network and that he would consult with a lawyer. In response the representative told him that he will send him the paper work that they have within 30 days.
In the mean time my brother will contact Dish Network to see what was the problem. There is the small chance that my brother just forgot to cancel the service but I doubt it since my mom remember that Dish Network came to pick up the receiver.
We don't really care about the money we just don't want to pay for someone else mistake.
This makes me really mad and I don't get mad very often
I'm pretty sure you have the right to demand that they provide evidence of the debt, and if they don't provide it and keep harassing you, there are legal routes you can take.
Contact a lawyer. Debt collection agencies very often violate the debt collection laws and get away with it because nobody challenges them on it.
My roommate and I have taken to letting the answering machine pick up the first time we get a call. It says both of our names very clearly. Often, the people calling hang up and immediately call again. This is when we pick up the phone call, which is ALWAYS looking for someone who used to have this number but no longer does, and tersely explain to the person that the answering machine message said who lived here and that the person they are looking for no longer has this number, so take this number off the list RIGHT FUCKING NOW thankyouverymuch.
The person calling us immediately apologizes, flustered. We tried being nice about it, but we kept getting calls, so now we are being mean and letting them know that we mean business. The calls have reduced significantly.
Nevermind, I found it.