Authorised, but more units or visits were billed than approved.
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.
More units or visits were billed than the authorisation approved.
A second episode of care was billed under the first episode's authorisation.
Appeal for the extra units with the treatment notes, or request a retro-extension.
The documentation, not the argument.
The common mistake. Do not write off the whole claim. Usually only the excess above the approved units was denied, and the rest paid.
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.
Authorised, but more units or visits were billed than approved. 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