This payer does not pay this service when this type of provider performs it.
CO: Contractual obligation. The provider absorbs it and cannot bill the patient.
So the balance cannot move to the patient. Either the appeal recovers it or the practice absorbs it. That makes the appeal decision the whole decision on this line.
Usually recoverable. Appeal it. The money is usually there.
In the order we see it.
The rendering provider type is not eligible for this service under the payer's policy.
The service met incident-to requirements but was billed directly.
Check whether the service qualified as incident-to, or should have been billed under a supervising provider the payer recognises.
The documentation, not the argument.
The common mistake. Do not rebill under a supervising provider unless the incident-to requirements were actually met. That is a compliance exposure, not a workaround.
Where this comes from. This is our own reading of the code, not the payer's and not a copy of the standards text. We classify it from how these denials actually resolve. Where we are unsure, we say so rather than guessing.
This payer does not pay this service when this type of provider performs it. So the balance cannot move to the patient. Either the appeal recovers it or the practice absorbs it. That makes the appeal decision the whole decision on this line.
This is our plain-English wording, not the official X12 text. X12 asserts copyright over the published descriptions, so we write our own and say what it means for the money rather than restating the code.
Upload your denial summary for the last 90 days. 4 columns: payer, CARC code, count, billed amount. You get back which were winnable and what they were worth.
Upload your denial export No patient data. No BAA. No charge.
AppealHound