Cochlear Americas Pays $950,000 to Settle Federal Kickback Allegations

shel90

Love Makes the World Go Round
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
45,078
Reaction score
335
Cochlear Americas Pays $950,000 to Settle Federal Kickback Allegations


To resolve charges that it illegally paid health providers to influence purchases of cochlear implants bought with federal money, Cochlear Americas has agreed to pay $880,000, plus $70,000 in legal fees, under a federal False Claims Act settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

According to federal documents, the U.S. Office of Inspector General alleged that between Jan. 1, 2001 and March 1, 2004, Cochlear Americas "paid remuneration" to audiologists, surgeons, and audiology clinics that purchased the implants with money from a Medicare and Medicaid. The remuneration, the OIG says, came in the form of "credits that could be used to purchase other of Respondent's products, as well as through various gifts, donations, and sponsorships."

The alleged illegal payments were discovered when a whistleblower filed a legal complaint under the federal qui tam law and False Claims Act in January, 2004.

In a statement, the Australia-based company said that it has agreed to pay $950,000, but "specifically disputes and denies the factual and legal allegations in relation to sales [programs] and other conduct alleged to have occurred from 1998 to 2003 in the USA. However to avoid ongoing legal fees and the uncertainty and expense of litigation, the parties have … agreed to resolve the matter."

The whistleblower who brought the original case, Brenda March, a former vice president and a director at Cochlear Americas in Colorado, receives $176,000 according to a statement from the Department of Justice. The federal government receives $704,000, and legal fees paid by Cochlear Americas amount to $70,000.

"Today's actions demonstrate that the United States will not tolerate the payment of kickbacks of any entity involved in providing medical goods or services to beneficiaries of federal healthcare programs," said Assistant Attorney Tony West, head of the Justice Department's Civil Division.

Added David Gaouette, U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado: "This office is determined to protect the integrity of the Medicare and Medicaid programs for the citizens of Colorado and of the United States."

The United States intervened in the lawsuit in January, 2007. In one of the complaint documents released by the Department of Justice, it was alleged that Medicare reimbursements to hospitals were "artificially high due to the improper financial incentives paid by Cochlear Americas to Physicians. Cochlear Americas, therefore, has willingly and knowingly caused such false claims to be submitted to Medicare."


Geez!
 
But how many times, when I have mentioned kickbacks and increased profits for the medical professionals that come from the CI manufacturers have I been told nothing like that ever happens?

In your face, people. It is all about money.:wave:
 
It was well known that this happened. It was between 6 and 10 years ago. That company was paying surgeons to only implant their brand. That is another reason I chose not to go with Cochlear.
 
It was well known that this happened. It was between 6 and 10 years ago. That company was paying surgeons to only implant their brand. That is another reason I chose not to go with Cochlear.

So, you believe that Cochlear is the only one guilty of this? Sad news for you...all the manufacturers engage in these practices. They just haven't been caught at it yet. Cochlear let their guard down and got caught. The rest of them are operating just outside that line on the down low. And the surgeons and the audis are involved as well.
 
So, you believe that Cochlear is the only one guilty of this? Sad news for you...all the manufacturers engage in these practices. They just haven't been caught at it yet. Cochlear let their guard down and got caught. The rest of them are operating just outside that line on the down low. And the surgeons and the audis are involved as well.

Cochlear was paying surgeons to only implant their device. That is what the fine is for. My daughter's surgeon implants all the devices, and allows the parents to decide which they prefer, and always has. Therefore, he was not involved.
 
Cochlear was paying surgeons to only implant their device. That is what the fine is for. My daughter's surgeon implants all the devices, and allows the parents to decide which they prefer, and always has. Therefore, he was not involved.

You have your head in the sand. Perhaps he was not involved in the Cochlear incident...but to say that he does not receive benefits from the manufacturers or make a profit is absurd. In fact, by implanting all of the devises, he only increases the amount of benefit he receives from more manufacturers.
 
Big pharma hands out cruises like candy. Any of these physicians been on a cruise lately?
 
hearing aid companies are the same..most audi offices "prefer" a ha company...so more or less if they scratch the companies back the company will scratch theirs
 
hearing aid companies are the same..most audi offices "prefer" a ha company...so more or less if they scratch the companies back the company will scratch theirs

Ew. I don't want to visit an audiologist who has just been scratching someone's back! :ugh3:
 
Than it is in no way a cochlear implant surgeon/company specific problem and should not be view that way.

Why shouldn't it be viewed that way? Just because HA dispensers are guilty too doesn't mean that the surgeons haven't jumped at the opportunity to get in on the kickbacks and the benefits. You have been one of the most vocal regarding the fact that things like this never happened in the CI business, and that CI surgeons were all loosing money. That is fantasy. This is reality.
 
Why shouldn't it be viewed that way? Just because HA dispensers are guilty too doesn't mean that the surgeons haven't jumped at the opportunity to get in on the kickbacks and the benefits. You have been one of the most vocal regarding the fact that things like this never happened in the CI business, and that CI surgeons were all loosing money. That is fantasy. This is reality.

I never said that surgeons were losing money, I said that when they implant a person on Medicaid, they CI center loses money because of the reimbursement.
 
Can you show me where you get your information that says that I'm wrong?

Experience. Working in the field. Being well aware of Medicaid reimbursement rates, and also the ways in which surgeons inflate their costs to cover that variable. Being aware of the same in regard to medical centers.
 
Experience. Working in the field. Being well aware of Medicaid reimbursement rates, and also the ways in which surgeons inflate their costs to cover that variable. Being aware of the same in regard to medical centers.

So if I have a chart that shows the Medicaid reimbursement rates, state by state, and that they go as low as 2%, I would still be wrong?
 
So if I have a chart that shows the Medicaid reimbursement rates, state by state, and that they go as low as 2%, I would still be wrong?

Probably, because you still aren't looking at all the ways those rates are offset. You are only looking at the re-imbursement rates for a small portion of what Medicaid is billed for and what the clinic bills for overall. Generally, all you can say is that lower reimbursement rates by Medicaid increases the cost overall to all of the other patients.
 
Back
Top