No Debt Collection Charges for Accretive Health in Settlement with FTC

  • Email
  • Print
  • Printing Articles

    1. Click here to print!
    2. ...or print directly from your browser by choosing File > Print... from the menu or by pressing [Ctrl + P]. Our printer-friendly stylesheet will make sure extraneous website stuff isn't printed.
    3. You're done!

    Close this message.

  • Comments
  • RSS

The Federal Trade Commission Tuesday announced a settlement with revenue cycle management and healthcare business services firm Accretive Health over patient information security concerns. But the FTC also issued a closing letter noting that it would not be pursuing enforcement actions related to debt collection, an issue that grabbed a lot of attention in 2012.

Under the settlement, Accretive (NYSE: AH) must establish a comprehensive information security program designed to protect consumers’ sensitive personal information. In addition, the company must have the program evaluated both initially and every two years by a certified third party. The settlement will be in force for the next 20 years.

The action stems from a July 2011 incident in which an Accretive employee’s laptop computer, containing 20 million pieces of information on 23,000 patients, was stolen from the passenger compartment of the employee’s car in Minnesota.  The attorney general in that state, Lori Swanson, also launched an enforcement action.

That was hardly the last Accretive heard from Swanson. Several months after her patient information suit, Swanson issued a report on Accretive’s first party debt collection practices. Touting some of the company’s practices as “bedside collections,” Swanson followed up with a lawsuit that was quickly settled for $2.5 million.

Certain elements of the accusations drew widespread attention. U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.) held a hearing on the matter with Swanson, to which Accretive issued a lengthy rebuttal. The story started popping up everywhere, including on popular late-night cable program “The Colbert Report.”

While the accusations were salacious, there was never a definitive answer as to whether Accretive’s debt collection practices were unlawful. In the settlement with Swanson, the company admitted no wrongdoing and its CEO vigorously defended the practices noting that many of Swanson’s claims were baseless or exaggerated.

At the end of 2012, nearly a year after the whole mess started, another state regulatory body weighed in. Vermont’s Department of Financial Regulation announced that it had concluded an investigation into Accretive and said it could not find any evidence that the firm violated state laws.

And that’s exactly what the FTC did Tuesday. The agency said that it would not recommend an enforcement action related to allegations concerning Accretive’s debt collection practices in hospitals. The closing letter notes that the FTC is declining to recommend a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) case against Accretive, the practice of attempting to collect payment for prior debts from consumers while they are seeking treatment in an emergency room or other medical facility raises serious concerns.

The FTC said it is reserving the right to launch an action in the future, but for now, it could not find evidence that the company’s debt collection practices were unlawful.

  • Email
  • Print
  • Printing Articles

    1. Click here to print!
    2. ...or print directly from your browser by choosing File > Print... from the menu or by pressing [Ctrl + P]. Our printer-friendly stylesheet will make sure extraneous website stuff isn't printed.
    3. You're done!

    Close this message.

  • Comments
  • RSS

Posted in Collection Laws and Regulations, Data Security, Debt Collection, FDCPA, Featured Post, Medical Debt Collection, Medical Receivables, Revenue Cycle Management .

×
Subscribe to our email newsletters

Continuing the Discussion

We welcome and encourage readers to comment and engage in substantive exchanges over topics on insideARM.com. Users must always follow our Terms of Use. Also know that your comment will be deleted if you: use profanity, engage in any kind of hate speech, post an incoherent or irrelevant thought, make a point of targeting anyone, or do anything else we find unsavory. Your comment will be posted under your current Display Name, shown below. If you'd like to change your Display Name, you must update it on the My Profile page.

  • avatar accountreceivable-management says:

    The age of a receivable is the number one determining factor if the receivable will pay, and how quickly the receivable will pay. In other words, the rates in which accounts are collected are determined mostly by the company placing the accounts rather than who the accounts are being placed with. Obviously, the methods an agency uses when collecting on an account will play a huge role in whether or not the account will pay, but understand that the same collection process is used no matter the age. Yet, aged accounts historically have a lessor chance of recovery. Well what defines an aged account? This definition is up for interpretation, but considering the FDIC acknowledges account receivables management past 90 days no longer assets rather liability’s, accounts over 90 days can be considered aged.
    visit for more details on
    http://www.bbwlf.com/services

Leave a Reply