<p>GP, the out of network costs are lower with BS than the in network costs were with UNH.</p>
<p>I don’t know what the in network costs of UNH are, but the out of network costs for BS could be quite painful if she needed to be hospitalized at UCSD. The amount of the bill from the hospital that is in excess of the in network allowable amount could be astronomical.</p>
<p>“But the bulk of the increase is due to the sick people who are now in your risk pool.”</p>
<p>CF, since these people are not denied care, how come it is not already reflected in our premiums?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I misspoke. It’s July 1st. I am allowed to keep my plan until the next renewal date, which is July 1st, in my particular case. Or, I can get a new plan effective January 1st. Since the exchange website isn’t working, that’s not a very attractive option…</p>
<p>“It’s July 1st”</p>
<p>Is it ACA compliant? Aren’t all non-compliant policies as of Jan 1st not getting cancelled?</p>
<p>Sick uninsured people are now denied care. They can’t be denied emergency care, but they certainly can be and are being denied other care. You can’t get chemotherapy in an emergency room. Nor can you get routine care for your diabetes or asthma or high blood pressure in an emergency room.</p>
<p>But assume for a moment that you were correct, and everyone who was denied private insurance was nevertheless managing to get health care paid not by themselves, but but the doctors and hospitals raising prices for everyone else. Then other people on private individual insurance, people with employer-supplied insurance, and people on Medicare would all be paying for those sick people without insurance. But now, with the ACA, when these sick formerly uninsured people buy an insurance policy and get health care, the cost of that care will not be spread over everyone, but will only be paid for by the people with private individual insurance who are not on grandfathered plans. And that’s a small percentage of all people, so each person’s portion of the cost is bigger.</p>
<p>Interesteddad, if you need medical care, I wonder if they are going to make you satisfy the deductible twice next year, like BS is telling me?</p>
<p>“Aren’t all non-compliant policies as of Jan 1st not getting cancelled?”</p>
<p>Where did you hear this?</p>
<p>GP - Isn’t that your news? :p</p>
<p>Isn’t that the law that starting 2014 most policies that are not compliant and not grandfathered get cancelled?</p>
<p>So either interesteddad gets to continue with his policy as grandfathered or when it expires he needs a different one?</p>
<p>I’m still following this thread and trying to absorb all the (often conflicting) information. All I can say…is that as a small employer (H and I are the employer and the employees) we jumped on the opportunity offered by BS of CA to keep our policy and to reset our renewal date to December 2014. (an offer ‘supported’ by Covered CA to avoid crashing the website and to hide the fact that the small business exchange was not ready on October 1st). Who the blazes knows what will happen when our time runs out… but for the moment it feels like we’ve secured a seat on a Titanic lifeboat. Hopefully the Carpathia has received the SOS signals and is on the way…What a God awful mess.</p>
<p>As a plan B…H and I are planning for concierge medicine (both in US and and outside US) as part of our retirement costs.</p>
<p>Texaspg, you’re right that insurance companies (other than BS) have not agreed to extend non-grandfathered, non-compliant plans beyond Jan 1. However, there is an exception to the law, where if your non-grandfathered plan is going to expire before the end of the year, the insurance company can renew the plan for another year without complying with ACA. Many small businesses are taking advantage of this. Many states, however, are not allowing insurance companies in the individual market to renew policies before year-end.</p>
<p>dietz199, I’m glad you were able to renew for another year. Next year, husband and wife businesses will not qualify for group coverage, so consider this a one year reprieve.</p>
<p>Ok, it still does not explain under what basis interesteddad has been able to keep a plan until July 1st if it is not renewable if the law starts on January 1st?</p>
<p>Edit: I am even more surprised Dietz’s plan can go until Dec 2014.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My plan cannot be grandfathered because I got it after 2010 when I moved to a new state. It can be grandfathered only until Dec 31 or whenever the next annual renewal date rolls around. Because I started the plan on July 1st, that’s the renewal date. I think that’s unusual to have a July renewal. Typically it’s Jan 1, which is why so many plans are cancelled effective Dec. 31.</p>
<p>I just got a letter from Blue Cross that seems to suggest a third option: an early renewal on Dec 1st that would make the termination date Dec 1, 2014. If I can confirm that as an option, I may do that.</p>
<hr>
<p>As far as the big stuff (no lifetime caps, etc.) my current plan is ACA compliant. I haven’t identified any significant (at least to me) way that it isn’t. In fact, it appears to be the model for the Catastrophic - Bronze range of ACA plans. To really determine if there are substantive difference would require access to a level of detail about the ACA plans that is simply not available. For private plans, you can download the 100 page details of benefits documents. I don’t think those are available for the ACA plans, although I’ve gotta suck it up and spend another evening trying to compare plans again in the next few days. If I want to take advantage of the early renewal option they seem to be offering, I have to do it next week – before Dec 15th.</p>
<p>Doesn’t matter, even if my plan is ACA compliant. It can’t be grandfathered because it wasn’t in place prior to 2010.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I just go by what the letter from Anthem Blue Cross tells me. In October, I received a specific letter advising me that my specific plan could not be renewed when it expires next July 1st because of Obamacare. The letter advised me that I could either:</p>
<p>a) Do nothing for now and get a new plan next July</p>
<p>b) Get a new plan, either direct from Blue Cross or from the Exchange (Blue Cross is the only Exchange provider in my state) effective Jan 1st.</p>
<p>A new letter last week (but more of a generic subscriber letter) offered the third option of an early renewal keeping my plan until Dec 2014. I’m not 100% confident that my plan qualifies for that option. I’ve got to call and find out as I may want to do that (if there’s no price increase).</p>
<p>I feel like I’m a reasonably informed consumer. I shopped pretty carefully for my plan and, other than the insane prices for individual plans, I feel like it meets my needs. The ACA plans are more expensive for similar coverage and drop my local hospital. So this whole thing is an aggravation to me.</p>
<p>Do they say on what basis they are offering this extension?</p>
<p>“I have to do it next week – before Dec 15th.”</p>
<p>Wrong month. Let’s not rush this. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>According to the letter, this is a way of reducing the impact of the fact that several major hospitals in the state (including my town’s hospital) are not currently on the network for the new ACA Blue Cross plans.</p>
<p>There’s an obvious game of chicken being played between Anthem Blue Cross and these hospitals. No hospital in the state will be able to survive without being on the network for the ONLY ACA insurance plans in the state. I’m not following it that closely, but this may be an accommodation negotiated at the state level. I doubt that Washington will object since it appears ACA is headed for a disaster – millions of people losing insurance coverage on Jan 1st and unable to buy replacement coverage. I don’t think that was the idea.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ooops. My bad. I still have to do it next week. It would be for a Dec 1st renewal, which has to be signed up for by November 15th, a week from today.</p>
<p>“major hospitals in the state (including my town’s hospital) are not currently on the network for the new ACA Blue Cross plans.”</p>
<p>This is the part I don’t understand. Blue cross already has deals with the hospitals. So what is the issue being on more/new plans for BC or Anthem since they have existing contracts?</p>