Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident objects to $75 'treat-no-transport' EMS charge; county says fee covers on-scene treatment
Summary
A Cusseta resident told commissioners he received an unexpected $75 EMS bill after paramedics treated him but did not transport him. County Manager Thomas Weaver and Chairman Charles Coffey explained the $75 charge covers treatment when no transport occurs and said staff will present itemized charges and discuss public outreach at a future work session.
A Cusseta resident raised questions at the Dec. 2 meeting about a $75 ambulance bill he received after emergency responders treated him on scene but did not transport him to a hospital.
Derrick White of Lafayette Road said he received the $75 charge and objected to being billed because he was not transported. He also said residents are often unaware of that charge until they receive a bill. County Manager Thomas Weaver and Chairman Charles Coffey responded that the $75 fee is a standard 'treat-no-transport' charge that covers personnel time, fuel and supplies when emergency medical services provide on-scene care without transport. Weaver said the $10 line item on the water bill is for 911 service and is separate from EMS treatment billing.
“If the ambulance comes out and treats but does not transport, that $75 is for treatment — not a transport charge,” Weaver said. He added that the $75 fee has been in place since the county ambulance service began. Weaver told the Commission he would produce an itemized statement of ambulance charges for the next meeting so commissioners can review how fees are assessed and consider public outreach or policy changes.
Chairman Coffey asked staff to place the issue on a future work session so commissioners can hear a fuller explanation for the public. No policy change or vote was recorded at the Dec. 2 meeting.
