The procedure does not match the provider type or specialty on file.
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.
Fix and resubmit. This is a correction, not an appeal. Appealing burns the deadline.
In the order we see it.
The taxonomy code on the claim does not match the payer's record for that provider.
The service was billed under a provider not credentialed to perform it.
Compare the taxonomy code on the claim against the rendering provider's enrolment, then correct whichever is wrong.
The documentation, not the argument.
The common mistake. Do not resubmit unchanged. Nothing about the claim will look different to the payer's edit.
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.
The procedure does not match the provider type or specialty on file. 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