Medical Billing Software > Medical Billing Software Reviews
Congrats to Kareo!
PMRNC:
I've just also found out that OfficeAlly has also begun their own billing company.
RobertJ:
--- Quote from: best biller on March 21, 2013, 09:49:55 PM ---I dont know what they do with existing customers, but you cant be from now their client for less then $299 a month per provider! and for that price it better to go with e-clinical works.
--- End quote ---
Is the charge only for using their PMS/EHR per month or does it also include all the scheduling, scanning, billing and posting for a provider?
RobertJ:
--- Quote from: gurumedbill on March 21, 2013, 12:54:48 PM ---
--- Quote from: best biller on March 21, 2013, 04:46:54 AM ---No congrats to them! they just doubled there price for nothing just because they saw that they have a lot of clients! the billing services need to switch away from a company like this!
--- End quote ---
I wondered if that is really the case. I saw on their website they got rid of all of their pricing but the $299 a month option but I didn't know if they still offered the other options for people that really wanted them or already have them.
Does that mean that if you were on the $149 or $199 a month, or even the $69 a month one where you pay for claims, that they aren't grandfathering people in? Does everyone have to pay $299 a month per provider for existing ones or is that just for new providers that you sign up?
--- End quote ---
The $299.00 is only for new customers. No additional burden on existing customers. You can check that out here. http://www.kareo.com/terms/pricing-policy
PMRNC:
For their billing services.. they list: 4-8% of Collections based on claim volume and specialty..Wonder how they are handling that in the states that prohibit physicians from fee-splitting arrangements?
RichardP:
Wonder how they are handling that ...
Let's see .... (average collections for last 36 months times 7%) divided by 12 = new fixed month fee - subject to review and revision every 12 months.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version