New (to me) Devoted process

[Fisher]

So I move a client to a 2025 Devoted plan. The next day she lets me know that she received a text from Devoted and wants to know if it's legit. Text reads:

"Hi *******, this is Lynn from Devoted Health. We received your application to join our Medicare Advantage plan starting on 01/01/2025! We just wanted to make sure this is correct. Did you recently apply to join a Devoted Health plan? (1) Yes. (2) No. Please reply 1 or 2."

I contacted one of my Devoted reps and her reply:

This is a brand new practice for Devoted. Pretty much, we have started to do this to help combat the ebrokers/call centers/immoral folks that call people and just change their plan without their knowledge.

If they don’t text back, they aren’t disenrolled. It’s just to make sure they are aware they were enrolled.

Not a horrible practice, I suppose. I would have preferred to know about it before a client shared it with me. I've now had another client call me with the same 'Is this legit?' question, so if you're writing Devoted tell your peeps to expect the text.

 

[vic120]

this is not new had this happen a few months ago
I had a new to Medicare he was an ACA client of mine
and he has been dealing with many many calls from robocalls

He got this text thought it was a telamrketer, he went off on them
they cancled his plan

then they would not allow him to just call in and say he wanted the plans

I had to get a new app signed

then the new app got declined

we had to go back and forth with them for weeks more to get the app through

and then AEP started, and for got about it till this thread, so I just went to check if I even got paid on this and I see it paid $76 initial then charged it back , so now I have to find out what happened again

Ugg

Honestly I am tempted to just let it go because this has cost me way too much time

 

[axeman462]

this is not new had this happen a few months ago
I had a new to Medicare he was an ACA client of mine
and he has been dealing with many many calls from robocalls

He got this text thought it was a telamrketer, he went off on them
they cancled his plan

then they would not allow him to just call in and say he wanted the plans

I had to get a new app signed

then the new app got declined

we had to go back and forth with them for weeks more to get the app through

and then AEP started, and for got about it till this thread, so I just went to check if I even got paid on this and I see it paid $76 initial then charged it back , so now I have to find out what happened again

Ugg

Honestly I am tempted to just let it go because this has cost me way too much time

Sometimes a client just ain't worth the time and effort. I've had similar scenarios happen to me over the years.
I've gotten to the point where I'll change them back once. But if it happens again, they're dead to me

 

[vic120]

Sometimes a client just ain't worth the time and effort. I've had similar scenarios happen to me over the years.
I've gotten to the point where I'll change them back once. But if it happens again, they're dead to me

The Client really did not know that was them

I went into the portal, on the 2nd app they changed back on Oct in the first week

I spoke to him 2 times after this, he did not cancel like he did not cancel the first time

the issue is devoted

and through the whole process they have been ruff to deal with, the portal shows approved is all you see

but they tell me the portal is not designed to show me cancels, and you have to push to get answers beyond what the portal says
its like they feel you don't have the right to know if a policy is still active

if anything is not worth the effort its devoted not the client

 

[GoPokes]

I have done some brainstorming on how to combat the call center practices.

I think the biggest challenge surrounding all the outbound non compliant marketing, is if you don’t do business with them, you don’t have any way to file a complaint. All they have to do is spoof the outbound call number, and that seems to be a pretty solid disguise. A beneficiary would have to enroll in a plan, to find out who is behind this, and then also file a complaint. I think it’s unlikely those who get the plan are also filing complaints.

A possible solution would be to have compliance folks with the phone numbers of recently deceased beneficiaries. They would also need fabricated MBI numbers, to be used for enrollments, specifically origination from outbound non compliant calls.

If the community of agents, carriers, and CMS, cannot come up with a solution, I fear the compliance that will just get more and more difficult. It

It appears that much of the new compliance in recent years, including bringing back SOA, and phone recording, isn’t really working as intended.

We still have A LOT of outbound non compliant calls.

 

[vic120]

I have done some brainstorming on how to combat the call center practices.

I think the biggest challenge surrounding all the outbound non compliant marketing, is if you don’t do business with them, you don’t have any way to file a complaint. All they have to do is spoof the outbound call number, and that seems to be a pretty solid disguise. A beneficiary would have to enroll in a plan, to find out who is behind this, and then also file a complaint. I think it’s unlikely those who get the plan are also filing complaints.

A possible solution would be to have compliance folks with the phone numbers of recently deceased beneficiaries. They would also need fabricated MBI numbers, to be used for enrollments, specifically origination from outbound non compliant calls.

If the community of agents, carriers, and CMS, cannot come up with a solution, I fear the compliance that will just get more and more difficult. It

It appears that much of the new compliance in recent years, including bringing back SOA, and phone recording, isn’t really working as intended.

We still have A LOT of outbound non compliant calls.

How are they going to come up with a solution

There is a lot of money made form this
but at the same time there is a lot of pressure to do something about this

does any one really not know why there are a lot of regulations that do not fix the problem?