Exchanges with People that Make Your Brain Hurt

[Diane AKA Traska]

It almost sounds like they overbook, like airlines do, and hope not everyone calls back to confirm, or shows up. I get calls from the docs in the medical group I go to, and I have the option to either press 1 to confirm, or 2 to cancel. But I've never ever had to call back in person to confirm.

I just got a call like that for my orthopedic follow-up.  *So* convenient. 

[Virg]

jpcher wrote:

"I clarified with the receptionist what the new rules were. Yes. Even though I made the appt. only 2 weeks before once they call me to remind me of the appt. I am required to call them back within 24 hours prior to my appt. in order to confirm. If I don't my appt. can and probably will be given to someone else and I will owe the $70 missed appt. fee even if I show up."

This is the part that hangs them.  The only rational argument for a missed appointment fee is that the doctor set aside an appointment time that cannot be billed due to the patient not showing up.  What rational argument can they present in charging a missed appointment fee to a person who's standing in the office at the time of their appointment?  If they filled the appointment in the meantime, there's no claim of lost earnings, and if they didn't, she's there to keep the appointment, so any way you slice it it sounds screwy bordering on fraudulent.

Virg

[Jocelyn]

jpcher wrote:

"I clarified with the receptionist what the new rules were. Yes. Even though I made the appt. only 2 weeks before once they call me to remind me of the appt. I am required to call them back within 24 hours prior to my appt. in order to confirm. If I don't my appt. can and probably will be given to someone else and I will owe the $70 missed appt. fee even if I show up."

This is the part that hangs them.  The only rational argument for a missed appointment fee is that the doctor set aside an appointment time that cannot be billed due to the patient not showing up.  What rational argument can they present in charging a missed appointment fee to a person who's standing in the office at the time of their appointment?  If they filled the appointment in the meantime, there's no claim of lost earnings, and if they didn't, she's there to keep the appointment, so any way you slice it it sounds screwy bordering on fraudulent.

Virg

You might want to mention this to your state's insurance commissioner.

[LB]

jpcher, did you sign anything acknowledging that they told you about this policy? Because if not, I would not pay that fee.

[jpcher]

jpcher, did you sign anything acknowledging that they told you about this policy? Because if not, I would not pay that fee.

No, I didn't.

I just figured that I'll remember to call them back to confirm my next appointment.

[Betelnut]

The other day I was taking a walk around the neighborhood with my daughter.  I noticed one of my neighbors fiddling with his car and sort of walking around outside his house.  I had noticed his car before in the driveway because it has a Darwin Fish on the bumper.  Since my car also has one, I felt a sense of neighborliness toward the gentleman right away since Darwin Fish are fairly rare bumper adornments around here.  This was the first time I had actually seen the owner/driver of the car though.

Me:  Hi!  I like your Darwin Fish!  I have one on my car too.  I've only seen about two or three others the entire time I've lived in this area.
Him:  <Quizzical look>  Uh, thanks...actually, it was on the car when I bought it.
Me: ...Oh, okay.  Have a nice day.

What gave me "brain hurt" was, well, why would you keep a bumper detail on your car, especially a slightly "controversial" one like a Darwin Fish if you didn't agree with it?  Maybe he didn't know what it meant?

Still slightly bewildered by the conversation.

[Shoo]

What gave me "brain hurt" was, well, why would you keep a bumper detail on your car, especially a slightly "controversial" one like a Darwin Fish if you didn't agree with it?  Maybe he didn't know what it meant?

Still slightly bewildered by the conversation.

Probably the same reason people don't remove the dealership advertisement license plate holders when they buy a car.  That's the FIRST thing I do!  I don't want to be a traveling advertisement for anyone!  I guess some people don't mind driving around with other people's stuff on their car.  Or maybe it never occurs to them that they CAN remove it!

[Mental Magpie]

The other day I was taking a walk around the neighborhood with my daughter.  I noticed one of my neighbors fiddling with his car and sort of walking around outside his house.  I had noticed his car before in the driveway because it has a Darwin Fish on the bumper.  Since my car also has one, I felt a sense of neighborliness toward the gentleman right away since Darwin Fish are fairly rare bumper adornments around here.  This was the first time I had actually seen the owner/driver of the car though.

Me:  Hi!  I like your Darwin Fish!  I have one on my car too.  I've only seen about two or three others the entire time I've lived in this area.
Him:  <Quizzical look>  Uh, thanks...actually, it was on the car when I bought it.
Me: ...Oh, okay.  Have a nice day.

What gave me "brain hurt" was, well, why would you keep a bumper detail on your car, especially a slightly "controversial" one like a Darwin Fish if you didn't agree with it?  Maybe he didn't know what it meant?

Still slightly bewildered by the conversation.

My guess he either didn't know or didn't care.  I once bought a car with Calvin peeing on my favorite sports team; you bet that sticker came off faster than the speed of light! (On another note, I wish I had super powers and that wasn't just hyperbole )


(Also, Hi!  I like your Darwin Fish!  I have one on my car too!)

[Slartibartfast]

You can look up my previous posts about SIL1, but suffice to say she's in her mid-forties and has the decision-making skills of someone a third her age.  Anyway, she and her newest boyfriend got thrown in jail last night.  They went out and got drunk, then started a fistfight with each other while in the car driving home.  Luckily they didn't hurt anyone but each other.  I can't even wrap my brain around the contortions required to give your partner a black eye while you're driving.  Anyway, Boyfriend violated his parole for assaulting SIL1 and drinking, and SIL1 now has her second drunk driving arrest.  Hopefully Boyfriend will be back in jail for months instead of days (giving SIL1 time to move on to another loser who will mooch off her, I guess).

Honestly, SIL1 is a brain hurt all to herself.

[marcel]

What gave me "brain hurt" was, well, why would you keep a bumper detail on your car, especially a slightly "controversial" one like a Darwin Fish if you didn't agree with it?  Maybe he didn't know what it meant?

Still slightly bewildered by the conversation.

For me a car is an instrument for driving in and transporting stuff, I do not care at all what it looks like, for me a bumpersticker would have to be extremely offensive (not just something I disagree with or don't care about) before I would remove it from a second hand car, so I can completely understand this man.

[wolfie]

You can look up my previous posts about SIL1, but suffice to say she's in her mid-forties and has the decision-making skills of someone a third her age.  Anyway, she and her newest boyfriend got thrown in jail last night.  They went out and got drunk, then started a fistfight with each other while in the car driving home.  Luckily they didn't hurt anyone but each other.  I can't even wrap my brain around the contortions required to give your partner a black eye while you're driving.  Anyway, Boyfriend violated his parole for assaulting SIL1 and drinking, and SIL1 now has her second drunk driving arrest.  Hopefully Boyfriend will be back in jail for months instead of days (giving SIL1 time to move on to another loser who will mooch off her, I guess).

Honestly, SIL1 is a brain hurt all to herself.

This reminds me of my own brain hurty moment.

I was in traffic court last week and got to hear lots of cases go up before i was called. The way this court worked was that the first person would be called up, and while they are talking to  the judge the next would be called, and they would sit on a chair near the bench. Once person one was leaving, person 2 stepped up and while they were talking person 3 would be set up. It made things go smoother. So it went a little something like this:

Bailiff: John Doe - step up please

Judge: (looks at license) What's your name?

Bailiff: Natasha Bonaparte (distinctive name is important)

Judge: "legal stuff" You are also charged with violating a restraining order against Natasha Bonaparte. Your license is currently suspended
Bailiff starts looking from John to Natasha.

John: yes sir - I am not driving - I got a ride here.

Judge: I need to understand what is happening here. Why were you in the passenger seat of Natasha's car

John: She picked me up

Bailiff goes over to talk to Natasha

Judge: She picked you up?

John: Yes sir.

Judge: more legal talk

Bailiff leans over and says something to the judge.

Judge looks over - "Are you the Natasha Bonaparte referenced?"

Natasha:yes

She gets invited over and they talk.

I am sure you can imagine the muted giggling in the galley as we realized the names coincided.

Also - if you are not sure what bail is for asking is a good idea. But once it is explained that it is to ensure you show up at the trial it really isn't a good idea to ask what happens to it if you don't show up for trial. And don't ask a second and third time if the Judge just keeps repeating that you need to show up for trial. The judge did say the money would be lost if he didn't show up but you could tell he was thinking about making it higher.

[CakeEater]

Sorry, Wolfie, you're making my brain hurt. I don't quite understand your story. Why was it funny that John was in Natasha's passenger seat?

The other day I was taking a walk around the neighborhood with my daughter.  I noticed one of my neighbors fiddling with his car and sort of walking around outside his house.  I had noticed his car before in the driveway because it has a Darwin Fish on the bumper.  Since my car also has one, I felt a sense of neighborliness toward the gentleman right away since Darwin Fish are fairly rare bumper adornments around here.  This was the first time I had actually seen the owner/driver of the car though.

Me:  Hi!  I like your Darwin Fish!  I have one on my car too.  I've only seen about two or three others the entire time I've lived in this area.
Him:  <Quizzical look>  Uh, thanks...actually, it was on the car when I bought it.
Me: ...Oh, okay.  Have a nice day.

What gave me "brain hurt" was, well, why would you keep a bumper detail on your car, especially a slightly "controversial" one like a Darwin Fish if you didn't agree with it?  Maybe he didn't know what it meant?

Still slightly bewildered by the conversation.

I must admit that I had never seen one and had to Google it just now. If I saw one on a car I had bought, I'd get what it meant, however.

[iridaceae]

Sorry, Wolfie, you're making my brain hurt. I don't quite understand your story. Why was it funny that John was in Natasha's passenger seat?

I imagine because Natasha had a restraining order against him which he violated and she cheerfully drove him to the hearing about his being in contact with her.

[Mental Magpie]

Sorry, Wolfie, you're making my brain hurt. I don't quite understand your story. Why was it funny that John was in Natasha's passenger seat?

I imagine because Natasha had a restraining order against him which he violated and she cheerfully drove him to the hearing about his being in contact with her.

That is also what I gathered.

[Hmmmmm]

What gave me "brain hurt" was, well, why would you keep a bumper detail on your car, especially a slightly "controversial" one like a Darwin Fish if you didn't agree with it?  Maybe he didn't know what it meant?

Still slightly bewildered by the conversation.

For me a car is an instrument for driving in and transporting stuff, I do not care at all what it looks like, for me a bumpersticker would have to be extremely offensive (not just something I disagree with or don't care about) before I would remove it from a second hand car, so I can completely understand this man.

I didn't see where he said he didn't agree with it. Maybe because I see them daily, but they don't seem controversial all that much to me.  And though I believe the design originated with an atheist movement, most people I know associate it more with a statement of evolution/creationism and many Christians to agree with some, if not all, aspects of evolution.