Business ProfileforKansas City Eye Clinic, P.A.

Bad work team, starting with the reception staff who deal with patients with arrogance, condescension and indifference, and in the event of repeated questions to inquire, the result is anger and annoyance from the employee, passing through the long wait that may sometimes exceed an hour and a half, ending with fabricating unreal invoices for medical services that the patient did not request. And finally, bad, incomprehensible management, whose only concern is looking for money, regardless of compassion and medical professionalism.

Mr. A*********s major contention is that services were not performed consistent with the balances due of $145 for each of two children ($290 total). That is entirely inaccurate. The charges are for each child: $95 dollars for a comprehensive ocular health exam for which there is ample documentation. $50 for a contact lens fitting, for which there is also ample documentation. I am not certain that a consumer complaint rises to the level of a circumstance that allows the disclosing of HIP AA covered information so I will not share them. It's also not necessary at this time. Everyone has been to the doctor, everyone knows that what transpires is heavily documented with measurements and codes to document the interaction First and foremost, Maria Abdulnabi and Abdullah Abdulnabi ("the children") were seen as patients in our clinic on a special program from Vision Service Plan (VSP), a very large insurance company that focuses on healthy eye care. It is NOT the sole responsibility of the eyecare providers _.: who have agreed to be part of this program to help economically disadvantaged students - to monitor the usage of the vouchers that the schools can sometimes carelessly hand out and the families may naively try to use too frequently. The children were here in November 2021 and returned in September 2022. VSP only reimburses eye care providers once per 12 months to provide ocular health exams and corrective lenses under this voucher program. The dispute centers on the morning of the visits of the children in the office for their visit September 24, 2022. After they were taken back to the exam rooms to see the doctor, the office staff tried to "pull and authorization" on the vouchers and found that the children's appointme!lts had been made by their parents too soon. Frankly, I was going to just accept responsibility for the matter and negotiate a discount, however, the children had had an additional service called a "contact lens fitting". These are not covered by the voucher program and we tell patients using vouchers what additional charges are so there are no surprises. They were told at Check-In and they were told by the doctor. Prior to their leaving, we attempted to collect $50 each for the Contact Lens fitting fee. A total of $100. A disagreement ensued. The children were holding trial contact lenses (lenses dispensed for free for patients to wear to ensure comfort and correct fit) so they must have had a fitting. Contact lenses are classified as a medical device; they can't be dispensed without the optometrist being satisfied that they fit the wearer appropriately. If they were given lenses to try at home, they were given a fitting. There is no point in doing a fitting unless the patient ASKS to be fitted for contacts. So not only did the children get a contact lens fitting, but they had to have ASKED to be fitted for contacts. The Kansa City Eye Clinic has about 30,000 patient visits per year, we know it's important to tell patients what will result in additional out of pocket costs. It's a well­ established process. So, THEY GOT THE SERVICES IN QUESTION. They had a comprehensive examination that they wanted to be free but they came back too soon to use the vouchers. And they also each got a contact lens fitting. Khloud Nabi is asking for a $290 refund which is the equivalent of both children's charges for the day. The is no reason for a refund because the family has paid ZERO DOLLARS towards these charges. You will notice that amongst the voluminous documentation that Mr. Nabi has forwarded to you, you will NOT find any receipts, cancelled checks or proof of payment. Zero refund could even be considered because NO ONE HAS PAID FOR THE SERVICES. I offered to erase the contact lens fitting charges ($50 for each child) in the amount of $100 if Mr. Nabi would pay for the comprehensive exams. I did not offer to erase the entire balance and behave as though the doctor never provided services. We are legally and ethically bound to forward medical records to any doctor that the children go to for care. Those records are evidence of the doctor's care, effort and work product. It would be wrong to behave as though the entire episode was a misunderstanding. The family elected to call us and present the children for services and they received those services. I'll restate, the provider cannot be the only party who is concerned about fair reimbursement for high quality highly caring services. The children were brought to the eye doctor with healthy eyes less than a year since their last visit. I offered a steep discount to be kind and charitable. I was re-buffed and ignored.