need help w/violations to sue

This is my take, though I am not a lawyer, and have only the information you furnished to go off of.

I have seen collection accounts reported with an opening date of when they received the account to collect. I think this is standard, though not sure how correct it is legally. In any event, it is a matter for the FCRA, not FDCPA. Not sure about the incorrect addresses part, care to elaborate?

I see another FCRA violation, in that they didn't note the dispute. Unfortunately, since you were passed the 30 days, they have no duty under the FDCPA to stop collection activity, so no violation there.

Wait, when did they send the printout? I think once they respond to your validation request they are giving weight to your claim, and might thereafter be required to stop collection activity. Then again, this may be a very incorrect assumption.

If your phone call contained violations then you need to have it recorded to be of any use.

I am not following this item, but see no violation on the face of it.

And the outcome? Did they ever return your messages? Again, there is no violation I can see.

I would love to help, but I don't see too much to go on there. You probably have much more info that you haven't posted here.

 

Jenasea,

Did they show you a form that you signed that you would be financially responsible and an itemized list of the charges?

This should be on letterhead from the hospital.

Start there, if they can't provide an instrument with your signature and an itemized list of charges and payments then they haven't validated anything.

At the same time, call the hospital and ask them for the same thing. See if they even have it available.

If they can't show the itemization, don't pay and it will be EASY to have the collection removed.

Don't believe anything the CA tells you and demand EVERYTHING in writing.

The other approach you could take, since this is a small amount, is payment in full for a deletion. Again, get any agreement in writing.

Let us know how it goes.

 

As validation, they didn't send her any kind of itemization. They sent her the sheet that states how you should take care of yourself after leaving the emergency room. This was the topic of an incredibly long thread about 3 weeks ago...

She paid it. She was trying to get it off by nutcasing I believe.

Jenasea,

I am definitely NOT an expert at this, but those violations don't look like they are enough. The only concrete one I see is that they didn't mark it in dispute. Given the fact that the guy you spoke to on the phone is a complete dumbass, I think he might actually try to take this crap to court and not settle with you for deletion. Hmmmm~

 

Martig4, did you actually read the post? Maybe you just skimmed over it and missed the part where she said it was already paid, etc.

I know I have this problem sometimes, but I try to go back and correct it once I realize.

 

You need to request valid evidence that the debt is yours AND that you AGREED to be responsible for the debt. (in other words, they need to show you a copy of the form that you signed giving the hospital permission to bill you if the insurance company did not pay [this is standard boilerplate for most medical facilities, you almost definately signed it]). Until they give you that proof then they have not validated the debt.

You did request validation did you not?

The Collection Agency coerced you into paying an amount that you were not reasonably certain was your debt to pay simply because you needed to improve your credit to purchase a vehicle, is this a true statement? If this is a true statement then the CA MAY owe you the money that you paid them.

Are you able to show damages? Did you get a bad rate on your car loan that would have been better if it weren't for this collection (or something similar to take the judge)?


The above is just my opinion, it is not advise.

PAE

 

Seems to me that this is information they should not be privy to. There was a thread around discussing such things, but I have no idea where it is or what the title was.

 

A patients medical records are highly confidential and are NOT to be released unless the patient has ok'd it, or by court order. You may have a big claim against the hospital for violation of your rights. You may want to talk to a lawyer.

 

I just did a quick search and found this on patient confidentiality. It is long. Found it at the AMA website:
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/4610.html

Patient Confidentiality

E-Mail Story Print Story Bookmark Page


Patient Confidentiality
Physicians have always had a duty to keep their patients' confidences. In essence, the physician's duty to maintain confidentiality means that a physician may not disclose any medical information revealed by a patient or discovered by a physician in connection with the treatment of a patient. In general, AMA's Code of Medical Ethics states that the information disclosed to a physician during the course of the patient-physician relationship is confidential to the utmost degree. As explained by the AMA's Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, the purpose of a physician's ethical duty to maintain patient confidentiality is to allow the patient to feel free to make a full and frank disclosure of information to the physician with the knowledge that the physician will protect the confidential nature of the information disclosed. Full disclosure enables the physician to diagnose conditions properly and to treat the patient appropriately. In return for the patient's honesty, the physician generally should not reveal confidential communications or information without the patient's express consent unless required to disclose the information by law. There are exceptions to the rule, such as where a patient threatens bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person.

The AMA's ethical guidelines are not binding by law, although courts have used ethical obligations as the basis for imposing legal obligations. Moreover, maintaining patient confidentiality is a legal duty as well as an ethical duty. A physician's legal obligations are defined by the U.S. Constitution, by federal and state laws and regulations, and by the courts. Even without applying ethical standards, courts generally allow a cause of action for a breach of confidentiality against a treating physician who divulges confidential medical information without proper authorization from the patient.

Despite these ethical and legal obligations, access to confidential patient information has become more prevalent. Physicians in integrated delivery systems or networks now have access to the confidential information of all the patients within their system or network. Confidential information also is disseminated through clinical repositories and shared databases. Sharing this information allows patients to be treated more efficiently and safely. The challenge for physicians is to utilize this technology, while honoring and respecting patient confidentiality.

What Is a Breach of Confidentiality?
A breach of confidentiality is a disclosure to a third party, without patient consent or court order, of private information that the physician has learned within the patient-physician relationship. Disclosure can be oral or written, by telephone or fax, or electronically, for example, via e-mail or health information networks. The medium is irrelevant, although special security requirements may apply to the electronic transfer of information.

The legal basis for imposing liability for a breach of confidentiality is more extensive than ethical guidelines, which dictate the morally right thing to do. Although current law in this area has been referred to as "a crazy quilt of state and federal law," protecting patients' confidentiality is the law of the land. Included in the patchwork are federal and state constitutional privacy rights, federal and state legislation and regulation governing both medical records and licensing, and specific federal and state legislation designed to protect sensitive information (e.g., HIV test results, genetic screening information, mental health records, and drug and alcohol abuse rehabilitation information).

Patient Consent to Release Confidential or Privileged Information
The general rule regarding release of a patient's medical record is that information contained in a patient's medical record may be released to third parties only if the patient has consented to such disclosure. The patient's express authorization is required before the medical records can be released to the following parties: patient's attorney or insurance company; patient's employer, unless a worker's compensation claim is involved; member of the patient's family, except where the family member has been appointed the the patient's attorney under a durable power of attorney for health care; government agencies; and other third parties. Some state laws expressly allow disclosure to any person upon consent of the patient. Other state laws permit release on patient consent only to specified classes of persons. Further, once the patient has given consent to release the record, the disclosure requirement may be mandatory for the holder of the medical record or merely permissive.

Managed care organizations (MCO) frequently require members to sign a general release form on enrollment in the plan. These forms authorize the release of medical information to the MCO. Typical language used in a release might be "that any provider may furnish the MCO such medical information as may be required and that the member acknowledges the MCO's right to conduct a professional utilization review program of health services and to coordinate benefits and/or reimbursements with other health or insurance programs." Before forwarding medical records to an MCO, utilization review programs or other health programs, physicians, hospitals, and others should get a signed copy of the patient's release of medical records.

 

Who Can Consent to the Release?
Who may grant permission to release medical record information is likewise governed by state law. Generally, the authority to release medical information is granted to: (1) the patient, if a competent adult or emancipated minor; (2) a legal guardian or parent if the patient is incompetent or a minor child; and (3) the administrator or executor of the patient's estate if patient is deceased. The patient's right to authorize release of medical records is codified in many state statutes. These statutes all state that medical records are confidential and cannot be disclosed, except in specifically provided circumstances. However, the extent of the patient's right to access varies from state to state. Some states allow the health care professional or provider to determine patient's right of access. In comparison, some states expressly grant patients access to the medical information contained in their medical records.

What Has to Be in the Release?
Typical elements of a valid general release include:


Patient's name and identifying information;
Address of the health care professional or institution directed to release the information;
Description of the information to be released;
Identity of the party to be furnished the information;
Language authorizing release of information;
Signature of patient or authorized individual; and
Time period for which release remains valid.
Some state laws add other elements, such as specifying on the form the reasons for disclosure or a caveat that the authorization may be revoked.

Failure to get the appropriate release for medical records may have serious results. Twenty-one states punish disclosure of confidential information by revoking a physician's medical license or taking other disciplinary action.

Implied Consent and Public Policy Exceptions or Required Disclosures
A patient's consent to disclosure of confidential information contained in a medical record may also be implied from the circumstances. For example, medical personnel directly involved in a patient's care or treatment generally have access to the medical record. Even if the patient has not expressly authorized disclosure of his or her medical record, such consent is implied from the patient's acceptance of treatment or hospitalization. Consent is also implied when a patient is transferred from one health care practitioner or facility to another. In such circumstances, disclosure of confidential patient information may be necessary to ensure continuation of patient care or treatment. State and federal statutes may also authorize or require disclosure of medical records to health care professionals or providers involved in the patient's treatment or upon transfer of the patient from one facility to another.

Safeguarding patient confidences also is subject to certain exceptions that are ethically and legally justified because of overriding social considerations. If there is a reasonable probability that a patient will inflict serious bodily harm on another person, for example, the physician should take precautions to protect the intended victim and notify law enforcement authorities. Communicable diseases and gunshot and knife wounds should be reported as required by applicable statutes or ordinances. Thus, the physician's duty of confidentiality at times must give way to a stronger countervailing societal interest.

General Management Safeguards and Security Tips
Physicians should have their contracts with system vendors, consultants, and all health care providers participating in a data repository reviewed by an attorney. They should also have comparable confidentiality and security policies; implement security controls over sensitive patient information (e.g., HIV status, pregnancy termination, and history of mental health problems or drug and alcohol abuse); maintain good system security; and train staff and secure agreements concerning confidentiality and security. It is also advisable to have security experts periodically assess the security of the clinical data repository and require that users who access the information sign appropriate user agreements.

Physicians should set up office procedures to prevent the release of medical records without a copy of the patient's release. The system could be as simple as attaching an office form to any request for medical records. The form would have a checklist indicating date of receipt of the request, date of receipt of the copy of the patient's release form, and date that the medical records were authorized to be sent to the requester.

Why Protecting Patient Confidentiality Is Still Important
Ethics and laws regarding confidentiality evolved long before the information highway was envisioned. The old laws and ethical precepts do not always fit neatly with today's computerized systems. Given the difficulties with compliance, some physicians and networks have only paid lip service to protecting patient confidentiality. This approach is short-sighted and unwise. The law will gradually catch up with the new system and seek to protect confidential patient information. In the interim, physicians should attempt to protect information to the extent possible and to comply with the "crazy quilt" of federal and state laws.

Physicians should inform patients of the limits of confidentiality protections and allow the patients to decide whether treatment outweighs the risk of the disclosure of sensitive information. A patient expects to have his or her privacy respected by the physician and should not be disappointed. If a record must be released, the patient should sign an appropriate release authorizing the disclosure of information in the medical record. General releases will not suffice for records containing HIV or other sensitive material.

Physicians should become familiar with laws involving the duty to maintain confidentiality. Any breach in confidentiality--even one that seems minor--can result in mistrust and, possibly, a lawsuit and/or disciplinary action.

 

Hi Jen,

I'm one of those who've been trying to nail this down, with conciderable difficulty I might add. It's VERY complex.

But I can tell you that they can't send medical charts. Billing information may be a different story however.

Keep us posted.