Posted 14 Nov 2022 I recently had a couple of tooth fillings with composite material, and the way I was charged was exactly similar to what you can see in this dispute. There are additional rows in the invoice saying "Adhäsive Befestigung" per filled tooth, which is about 16€ each. But my private insurance refuses to reimburse it by saying: "Der Ansatz der Ziffer 2197 ist bereits Leistungsinhalt der Ziffer 2080 und kann nicht zusaetlich berechnet werden". I'm not sure if I understood the verdict and the reasoning in the above this dispute. Does it mean that neither private nor public insurance is obliged to pay those costs? I found it a little strange. I intentionally chose a comprehensive private dental insurance a few years ago to make sure I do not have to pay anything when I need such fillings. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 14 Nov 2022 It means that your dentist has charged you twice for the same thing, since position 2080 already contains the work listed under position 2197. Send him/her a print-out of the page you found and ask him/her to issue a new, corrected invoice without position 2197. You may also want to send him/her a print-out if this page: https://dzw.de/goz-2197-goz-2060-adhaesive-befestigung 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 14 Nov 2022 1 hour ago, PandaMunich said: It means that your dentist has charged you twice for the same thing, since position 2080 already contains the work listed under position 2197. Send him/her a print-out of the page you found and ask him/her to issue a new, corrected invoice without position 2197. You may also want to send him/her a print-out if this page: https://dzw.de/goz-2197-goz-2060-adhaesive-befestigung It seems like there is no clear-cut way to that. Also, your link shows different trials perceived similar cases in different ways. Apparently, a dentist is able to professionally justify having both positions in the bill. 0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 15 Nov 2022 No, but either you can try... and see what transpires... it could go either way... or save your nerves, time and energy, capitulate early and pay, thereby enabling the skullduggery. It stinks. I really hate that. What will you do ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 15 Nov 2022 57 minutes ago, fraufruit said: Always do what Panda says. Wise advice about wise advice 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 16 Nov 2022 On 15/11/2022, 08:55:34, fraufruit said: Always do what Panda says. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 17 Nov 2022 I already discussed the problem with the dentist a couple of weeks ago. I didn't have the above link about past relevant dispute cases. But I gave them the letter the private insurance company had written me. In response, the doctor wrote something to the insurance indirectly saying, "You are not in the position to ask/judge us about how we issue our invoices. Take it or leave it!!!". It was as if they wanted to bully the insurance company! Anyway, I will not continue with that dentist anymore due to other issues I had with him regarding his work style and his ignorance of my valid requests. So, I hesitate to contact them again regarding this issue. But I was curious to see if there is any clear legal way to prevent such a thing from happening by another dentist in the future. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
