Good News

Just got a very helpful and positive voicemail from Karen at Gallagher, saying that she heard from her contact at MCHA and he talked with Compliance and they confirmed that I *will* be covered, no matter who termed who. Since it was a voicemail he left her, and a voicemail she left me, I didn't have a chance to ask why all the conflicting information, but it seems that there are situations that they make exceptions from the norm, and extenuating circumstances (such as a terminal condition if untreated) counts as a worthy exception. As it should.Since both messages (the one to her from MCHA, and the one from her to me) are now recorded and saved voicemails, we have a good evidence trail.

FYI, apparently the MCHA contact did mention that if someone was Termed for non-payment, that would be a reason to deny coverage for 6 months (though it seems like if you're the fallback insurance company that is designed to cover people who can't get coverage anywhere else for whatever reason, should that really matter? THe past is the past, and people who are willing to pay up front for coverage (which you have to do with MCHA or any insurance company) should be covered. Anyhow, it doesn't apply in my case, but good to know.

So, that all makes me breathe easier.

This was the first message from Karen that I felt she was starting to take this seriously, FYI. Before, its always sounded like she was doing me a favor by continuing to look into this for me.

Hopeful that I'll get the letter from MinnesotaCare today and maybe -- just maybe -- MCHA will approve this ASAP.

Insurance reform, anyone?