Can I sue the hospital for my bills if I was admitted against my will?

[shawnbliman]

State: CO

Hello legal advice geniuses,

2 years ago my wife was admitted against her will to the hospital. She got involved in a hit and run while walking back from the bars. She had been drinking a little bit but was not drunk by any means. When she got hit the people who witnessed it called 911 and an ambulance for UC-Health showed up. At this point I got a call as well and showed up on the scene, she did seem hurt but not badly and she was not interested in going into the ambulance with the EMT's because she didnt want to pay for a ride that was less than 2 minutes away from the hospital.

However, they looked at her and said since shes been drinking that she must be admitted against her will. She agreed since she didnt want to argue with them and they took her to the hospital at which time she was charged over $15k.

After she got out she called her car insurance company and they agreed to help pay for the bill a l little, and than her insurance company at the time said they will pay the bulk of it.

Fast forward almost 2.5 years later and we get a call from UC-Health, the hospital that took her in, and they said that there was some kind of billing mistake? And that she owes them $2000+ which was her out of pocket maximum at the time.

Now this is getting ridiculous, they have had every chance to figure out billing to begin with, they cant come back almost 3 years later and ask for more money.

Do you know if we can sue them for billing errors? I told me wife to talk to the hospital and explain our situation and when she called they said that "she signed a document agreeing to care from the hospital."

Well we just received a copy of this supposed document and it shows that it was signed by someone else that was not her at the hospital that authorized her treatment without her permission.

Do you think we have a case here?

 

[quincy]

She was initially charged “over $15k?”

It would not be unusual for a hospital to send out a bill for services long after the time of service.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Do you know if we can sue them for billing errors?

That lawsuit would get dismissed. There is no prohibition in federal or Colorado law against the hospital simply sending you bills several years after treatment. And you aren't suffering any harm just from getting bills.

If the creditor reports the debt to the credit bureaus your wife may dispute the debt with the credit bureau and have a notation added to the credit report that she disputes the debt. If the creditor sues your wife then your wife defends the claim and may assert there that she did not agree to these charges.

 

[adjusterjack]

Do you think we have a case here?

Nope. Here's why.

She agreed since she didnt want to argue with them

All you can do now is get an itemized list of the charges and go back to the medical insurance company that she had at the time of the accident and see how much of the additional amount would be covered.

 

[LdiJ]

Nope. Here's why.



All you can do now is get an itemized list of the charges and go back to the medical insurance company that she had at the time of the accident and see how much of the additional amount would be covered.

She didn't argue with the ambulance people, not the hospital people.

Well we just received a copy of this supposed document and it shows that it was signed by someone else that was not her at the hospital that authorized her treatment without her permission

 

[Taxing Matters]

Nope. Here's why.

I disagree. She agreed to go with the ambulance personnel, and that bill has apparently already been addressed. That agreement does not act as an agreement for all the medical treatment to follow at the hospital. The hospital needs to prove that she agreed to pay the charges to succeed on a contract claim. The hospital might still claim unjust enrichment if it can't prove the contract claim, but that would only work for treatment that the OP's wife clearly knew she was getting at the time and did not speak up to refuse said treatment. So it would matter exactly what the service was that the hospital is seeking to collect. Lots of things that a hospital may do might not be known to the patient until well after the fact. I'm not saying that the hospital could not succeed in its claim. I'm saying we lack the facts to know for sure how that would come out, and thus your definite claim that the OP's wife could not win is way premature.

 

[quincy]

In emergency rooms, if the injured or ill person arrives by ambulance or cannot grant written permission due to their condition, authorization for treatment can be expressed orally and/or signed by a hospital admissions staff member in the patient’s room rather than at the front desk (where the hospital staff will generally check insurance information).

 

[Taxing Matters]

In emergency rooms, if the injured or ill person arrives by ambulance or cannot grant written permission due to their condition, authorization for treatment can be expressed orally and/or signed by a hospital admissions staff member in the patient’s room rather than at the front desk (where the hospital staff will generally check insurance information).

But unless the patient is unable to make his or her own medical decisions the hospital needs to get the consent for treatment from the patient (assuming the patient is an adult). While consent may be given orally, there is of course always the issue that proof of that is more difficult should the medical provider later seek to sue to collect for the charges.

 

[LdiJ]

In emergency rooms, if the injured or ill person arrives by ambulance or cannot grant written permission due to their condition, authorization for treatment can be expressed orally and/or signed by a hospital admissions staff member in the patient’s room rather than at the front desk (where the hospital staff will generally check insurance information).

Except that the OP's explanation of things indicated that his wife was perfectly capable to of authorizing treatment or not...and the OP indicated that someone other than his wife authorized treatment. He did not indicate who that person was, but it clearly wasn't his wife.

 

[quincy]

But unless the patient is unable to make his or her own medical decisions the hospital needs to get the consent for treatment from the patient (assuming the patient is an adult). While consent may be given orally, there is of course always the issue that proof of that is more difficult should the medical provider later seek to sue to collect for the charges.

Treatment won’t be denied in an emergency whether there is insurance or not, or the ability to pay or not. I agree, however, that it would be harder to collect from someone who has not personally signed an authorization form.

I am still curious about the $15,000 billing. Ambulance rides and ER treatment can be expensive but that seems off - unless the injuries were more serious than originally indicated.

 

[eyeonforever]

State: CO

Hello legal advice geniuses,

2 years ago my wife was admitted against her will to the hospital. She got involved in a hit and run while walking back from the bars. She had been drinking a little bit but was not drunk by any means. When she got hit the people who witnessed it called 911 and an ambulance for UC-Health showed up. At this point I got a call as well and showed up on the scene, she did seem hurt but not badly and she was not interested in going into the ambulance with the EMT's because she didnt want to pay for a ride that was less than 2 minutes away from the hospital.

However, they looked at her and said since shes been drinking that she must be admitted against her will. She agreed since she didnt want to argue with them and they took her to the hospital at which time she was charged over $15k.

After she got out she called her car insurance company and they agreed to help pay for the bill a l little, and than her insurance company at the time said they will pay the bulk of it.

Fast forward almost 2.5 years later and we get a call from UC-Health, the hospital that took her in, and they said that there was some kind of billing mistake? And that she owes them $2000+ which was her out of pocket maximum at the time.

Now this is getting ridiculous, they have had every chance to figure out billing to begin with, they cant come back almost 3 years later and ask for more money.

Do you know if we can sue them for billing errors? I told me wife to talk to the hospital and explain our situation and when she called they said that "she signed a document agreeing to care from the hospital."

Well we just received a copy of this supposed document and it shows that it was signed by someone else that was not her at the hospital that authorized her treatment without her permission.

Do you think we have a case here?

I think you are approaching this from the wrong direction. You don't need to sue the hospital just talk to the billing department. Tell them she had refused to be taken by ambulance and she didn't even agree to receive treatment. That's fraud. Tell them it's fraud and you don't have to pay the bill.

 

[quincy]

It does not sound like fraud. I agree that speaking to the billing department is the first step. A lawsuit (if warranted) should be the last.

 

[Just Blue]

I think you are approaching this from the wrong direction. You don't need to sue the hospital just talk to the billing department. Tell them she had refused to be taken by ambulance and she didn't even agree to receive treatment. That's fraud. Tell them it's fraud and you don't have to pay the bill.

I'm curious...do you really read the opening post before offering "advice"?

 

[quincy]

eyeonforever has his/her own thread in this section of the forum and may have decided to offer some advice to others while waiting on our responses.

 

[HighwayMan]

Now this is getting ridiculous...

What's a bit ridiculous is that your wife took no responsibility for her medical treatment after the fact. She should have gotten a statement of benefits from her health insurer outlining what she was billed for and what her insurance was paying.

I'd be willing to bet that her condition was worse than either you or she realized. Maybe you're so used to seeing her intoxicated that it didn't seem like a big deal to you. In addition, WHY did you not go to the hospital with her? If it was a relative or friend of mine, especially my wife, they would not be left at the hospital alone, no matter how minor you claim her injuries were. If I was on the scene she would definitely have to go to a hospital - Someone who has obviously "been drinking" and gets hit by a car - that's a definite trip to the ER.

I also have to question why she was out barhopping and drinking and had to walk home alone.

So exactly what treatment DID she receive at the hospital and what was the actual extent of her injuries?

Was that vehicle owner's insurance involved at all? I would think they should have been.