this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2024
257 points (97.4% liked)

politics

18993 readers
2313 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Just because it’s not on a report doesn’t mean providers have no recourse when it comes to seeking compensation.

No, but most of the time it's simply not worth it for hospitals to fight. Either they'd spend more time and money on lawyers, arbitration, etc. than they'd be able to collect if they win, or the patient is poor and all but judgement-proof.

If they so choose they can take anyone to court and obtain a legal judgement. The frequent calls and letters from collectors are no picnic either.

If I recall reading the updated proposal from the CFPB correctly, it's supposed to be putting a stop to the debt collectors too. The only recourse left, if I'm reading everything correctly, would be for the hospitals to sue patients directly, and that would probably only be for bills high enough to make seeking legal action worth it and if they feel the patient has the resources to pay. The latter is the most important part -- whether the bill is for $100 or eleventy billion dollars won't matter if the patient is, for example, and elderly woman on disability with no possible way to repay anything.