I would rather stick to what I read in the original report here. My uncle had to have a very simple medical procedure done at Royal Oak Beaumont. Now, he has been notified by his insurance company that the procedure should have been outpatient and should have cost a fraction of the cost.
Now the insurance company is not blaming my uncle (kind 0f) and they are not saying that they are not going to pay but they are requesting a thorough investigation into Royal Oak Beaumont. Apparently, Beaumont has been invesigated numerous times in recent years for these type of situations. And, with my uncle, it wasn't just keeping him a day or two. They kept him 10 days just so that they could milk the insurance company. So needless to say, I am very interested in all of this about patient confidentiality. And then to have all of THIS drama sure as heck doesn't make me want to go there. As for the rest, it sounds like some bitter divorcee that can't handle the fact that her husband is remarried. Clearly, all of the rebuttals are the same person or at least close friends of the same person. This guy has had these postings on this site for some time so I find it hard to believe that he just posted a bunch of lies. Plus, who would waste that much time typing all of that text? - Has to be the same person.
0 comments