July 5, 2019

No Image

Why Cash Transfer Apps Don’t Always Let You Hit ‘Undo’ On Transactions

Phone-based apps are offering people many new ways to pay, and many of them are wondering about chargebacks, and why some apps allow people to hit undo and why others don’t.



AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

Cash transfer apps, like Venmo, let you pay a friend back $5 for popcorn. They let you post fun messages about late-night bar tabs. One thing they don’t always let you do, undo transactions. Elah Feder from our Planet Money podcast explains why.

ELAH FEDER, BYLINE: A couple of months ago, I accidentally sent $1,500 to a stranger on Venmo. I was trying to send a security deposit to my new landlord. But, thanks to a typo, I sent it to some guy in Alabama instead. So Venmo is an app on your phone that lets you pay your friends, pulls money from your bank account. Really easy to use – until you mess up when you find out that just hitting undo and getting your money back is not an option.

But the whole idea that we could even instantly get our money back is actually an invention, and not even a very old one. Back in the ’60s, when credit cards were the cool, new payment technology, people had nightmares like this all the time.

CHI CHI WU: They would be charged the wrong amount. They would be double charged. There would be some sort of math error.

FEDER: Chi Chi Wu is a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center.

WU: Or someone would take their card and use it without their consent. And they would try to battle with the credit card companies to get them to fix the error. And the problem was the credit card companies would just ignore them and, in fact, would just, you know, keep demanding payment without addressing the consumer’s complaint.

FEDER: So eventually, Congress kicks into action, starts passing laws. And in 1974, they give us the all-mighty chargeback, which is…

WU: When you challenge something on your credit card and it gets reversed. It’s charged back to the merchant.

FEDER: That’s right, we can get a chargeback because of the law. And now we can get our money back with just one call. We’re used to that kind of safety net. But along come apps like Venmo, where if you make a mistake there is no undo. Why not? Well, maybe because like all good things, the power to undo comes at a cost. When we have it, we go wild. Katie Cover (ph) has seen her fair share of ridiculous credit card chargebacks.

KATIE COVER: There was somebody who had taken golf lessons and then at the end had disputed that their score hadn’t improved a sufficient amount, and they were dissatisfied.

FEDER: Solution – chargeback. Katie works for Square, a company that helps businesses process credit cards. If a business gets a chargeback they think is unfair, Katie’s team helps them fight it. Like the time a baker got a chargeback for an $800 wedding cake. The baker was upset, but luckily…

COVER: She had posts from social media where she had taken screenshots, and it was the couple and they were with their guests celebrating and eating the cake. And there were comments on social media from their guests saying how much they enjoyed it and from the couple saying that they were thrilled and wasn’t it a wonderful cake?

FEDER: With Katie’s help, the baker got to keep the money. But it doesn’t always end well for businesses. Katie told us about a family business that had to shut down after they lost a chargeback case. Venmo didn’t want to talk on tape for this. Instead, they sent an email listing all the ways that they prevent people from making mistakes in the first place. They also said, quote, “making funds instantly available to recipients is part of why customers love using PayPal and Venmo,” end quote. By the way, Venmo is owned by PayPal.

Bottom line, Venmo isn’t a credit card, and there is no undo button. I was lucky. I did get my money back, and the person I sent it to was super nice. But lesson learned. If you send money on these apps, you’d better get your spelling right. For NPR News, I’m Elah Feder.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

U.S. Prepares To Face The Netherlands In Women’s World Cup Final

The U.S. will face the Netherlands in the Women’s World Cup Final on Sunday. The U.S. women are the defending champs and looking to secure their fourth World Cup title.



MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST:

On Sunday, soccer fans will be watching the final game in what has been a thrilling Women’s World Cup, especially thrilling if you are a United States fan. The defending champion U.S. team plays the Netherlands. This is the Americans’ third straight World Cup final, and they are going for a record fourth title. The Dutch meanwhile have never gotten this far in the tournament.

NPR sports correspondent Tom Goldman joins us now to talk about the Women’s World Cup and what to expect this weekend. Hey, Tom.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Hi, Mary Louise.

KELLY: So safe to say the U.S. is the favorite going into this game. Why are they so darn good?

GOLDMAN: Yeah, very safe to say. They have an incredibly deep lineup. They beat a very good English team in the semifinals without the star who has carried them through the knockout round, the lavender-haired Megan Rapinoe. She was out with a hamstring injury for that game.

KELLY: Yeah, is she going to be back for the final, by the way?

GOLDMAN: You know, she says she will – so fingers crossed on that.

KELLY: OK.

GOLDMAN: Then, you know, you have players like Carli Lloyd, Christen Press, Mallory Pugh, outstanding players who could start for most other teams. They haven’t regularly been in the U.S. starting lineup. And on top of that, you’ve got the firepower – great attacking scoring forwards. Alex Morgan is tied for the scoring lead in the tournament. The U.S. has scored early in all of its games, so the Americans have put opponents back on their heels early.

And of course the U.S. defense has been stout when it’s needed to be. Goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher had a number of game-changing saves against England – so just a few reasons, Mary Louise, why this is a heck of a formidable group.

KELLY: Yeah, good offense, good defense – and tell us about their opponent, the Netherlands team. How are they shaping up?

GOLDMAN: Yeah – very good team. Obviously you have to be to get this far. They are the reigning European champions. And most of that championship team from 2017 is playing on this World Cup squad. So there’s continuity. There’s familiarity, and that helps a lot.

KELLY: Experience, sure.

GOLDMAN: Yeah, and specifically they have a trio of attacking forwards who make the Dutch a very exciting team. And I am going to pronounce their names effortlessly for you or at least attempt to.

KELLY: (Laughter) OK, go.

GOLDMAN: We have Vivianne Miedema. We have Lieke Martens. And we have Shanice Van de Sanden. So they…

KELLY: Flawless. I love it.

GOLDMAN: Almost flawless.

KELLY: Yes.

GOLDMAN: A little hitch on that last one. A potent group of scorers although their attacking style of play also could lead to problems for them. If the U.S. defense is on form, it could leave Holland vulnerable to counterattacks.

KELLY: Now, meanwhile, a little controversy brewing – which is that as exciting as this match you’ve persuaded me is going to be on Sunday, it’s not the only big soccer match happening on Sunday, which is prompting some questions, I gather, from the women’s team about having to share the spotlight. What’s going on?

GOLDMAN: Yeah, that’s right. You have the Copa America final matching the top teams in South America. You have the CONCACAF Gold Cup final also on Sunday. Now, that’s normally a great matchup between the U.S. men and Mexico archrivals. Kudos to the U.S. men, by the way. They’ve not had the same international success as the women, and it’s good for them to be in a final like this.

But Rapinoe in particular was outspoken about her disappointment that there’s this confluence of events. The women play at 11 a.m. Eastern on Sunday. The other finals are later in the day – so no overlap. But Rapinoe, you know, puts this in a larger context of the women always having to scrap for more money, better working conditions. And it’s her strong belief that this is just another slap.

KELLY: All right, lots of soccer, lots of play coming on Sunday. That’s NPR’s Tom Goldman. Thank you.

GOLDMAN: You’re welcome.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Doctors Slow To Adopt Tech Tools That Might Save Patients Money On Drugs

Physicians complain that there’s not yet a standard drug-pricing tool available to them that includes the range of medicine prices each of their patients might face — one that takes into account their particular pharmacy choice and health insurance plan.

Exdez/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Exdez/Getty Images

When Mary Kay Gilbert saw her doctor in May for a skin infection on her leg, she wasn’t surprised to receive a prescription for an antibiotic cream.

But Gilbert, 54, a nurse and health consultant, was shocked when her physician clicked on the desktop computer and told Gilbert the medicine would cost $30 on her Blue Cross and Blue Shield plan.

“I was like, ‘Wow — that’s pretty cool that you know that information,’ ” she recalled telling the doctor in Edina, Minn.

Allina Health, the large Minnesota-based hospital network Gilbert’s doctor belongs to, is one of a growing number of health systems and insurers providing real-time drug pricing information to physicians so they can help patients avoid “sticker shock” at the pharmacy.

The pricing tool, which is embedded in each participating physician’s electronic health records and prescribing system, shows how much patients can expect to pay out of pocket, based on their insurance and the pharmacy they choose.

It also allows the doctor to find a cheaper alternative, when possible, and start the process of getting authorization for a drug, if the insurer requires that.

The soaring cost of drugs has been front and center in the growing national debate about revamping U.S. health care.

Patients abandon hundreds of thousands of prescriptions each year at the pharmacy, often because of high prices. Studies show that can jeopardize their health and often lead to higher costs down the road.

Such a tool can help consumers — many of whom are also facing increasing copayments and higher deductibles — learn about cheaper options in the doctor’s office.

Still, doctors have been slow to adopt the technology, sometimes because of concerns about getting bogged down in long discussions about drug costs. Humana, for example, introduced its drug pricing tool to its network of doctors in 2015. Today, fewer than 10% are using it, according to Humana officials.

These sorts of pricing tools do have serious limitations. Because price negotiations among insurers, drugmakers and middlemen are often highly competitive and secretive, the tools often don’t have useful data for every patient.

For example, Allina’s works for only about half its patients. The company says that’s because not all pharmacy benefit managers share their data on health plan enrollee costs, and those that do often provide only a fraction of their information.

“It’s a chicken-and-egg thing where doctors don’t use it because they don’t have the data for all their patients, and health plans don’t promote it to physicians because doctors don’t have the technology in place,” says Anthony Schueth, a health information technology consultant in Jacksonville, Fla. “It can be a powerful tool when it works, but at the moment the drivers are not there across the board for widespread adoption.”

At a hearing last month, Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz, pressed a top Trump administration health official about why many patients lack access to information on prescription drug prices at their doctor’s office.

“This is America. Why can’t we have this tool available now?” she asked. “The data is out there; the information is out there. What is it going to take to make this happen?”

The technology got a boost last month when the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services mandated that all Medicare drug plans embed such a tool in their doctors’ electronic prescribing system starting in 2021.

The details of what consumers spend out of pocket for drugs is provided by pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. They are the middlemen who negotiate with drugmakers on the prices insurers will pay for the medications and which ones the insurers will cover. So a tool’s usefulness is undermined when key PBMs are not included in the listings.

For example, a drug pricing tool sold by Surescripts, which is owned partly by the PBMs CVS Caremark and Express Scripts, includes data from those companies, but not from OptumRx, a PBM owned by insurance titan UnitedHealth. And the OptumRx drug pricing tool includes Optum data but not that of Express Scripts and CVS.

Demetrios Kouzoukas, who heads the Medicare program for CMS, says he hopes the program’s new drug mandate will spark the industry to provide doctors and patients access to a standard pricing tool, regardless of their insurance.

“What we are hoping and expecting is that there will be a standard that’s developed by the industry … so that the tool is available in all the electronic health records, for all the doctors and all patients, and spreads even beyond Medicare,” he told McSally at the hearing.

But cooperation does not seem to be on the horizon, some health industry officials say.

“I don’t see any chance that there will be a centralized system that will connect all of the plans/PBMs with all of the EHR systems currently in use anytime soon,” says Thomas Borzilleri, CEO of InteliSys Health, a health technology company based in San Diego.

Still, the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs, a nonprofit group that helps set guidelines for the pharmacy industry, has been working on standards for a drug pricing tool. John Klimek, a senior vice president of the nonprofit, predicts that by next year doctors across the country will be able to use the same drug pricing tool to look up all their patients’ drug costs, regardless of the insurer.

Even without such a standard in place, doctors and hospitals have an incentive to use the tool that goes beyond saving their patients money: Such a tool can be good for a provider’s wallet, too.

For example, Allina, which owns or operates about a dozen hospitals and dozens of clinics in Minnesota and Wisconsin, gets a set fee from some insurers to care for all of a patient’s health needs. So the doctors and health system all benefit when they can reduce costs and improve patients’ adherence to taking their medication, says Dr. David Ingham, a family doctor also from Edina. He’s one of 600 primary care doctors at Allina using the tool.

“When we prescribe a more expensive medication, we share less revenue from the insurance contract,” he says.

For example, he notes that the tool helped him prescribe inhalers to asthma patients.

“I pulled up one medication I normally use, and it said it would be $240 out of pocket, but it suggested an alternative for $20 that was pharmacologically equivalent,” Ingham says. “I sheepishly asked the patient which we should choose.”

Dr. Norman Rosen, a family physician in Orange, Calif., who is employed by Providence St. Joseph Health System, is one of 800 doctors who are testing the Blue Shield of California drug pricing tool this year. Based on the first few months of use, the tool is expected to save patients more than $100,000 in out-of-pocket costs this year, according to the companies.

Without the tool, Rosen says, it would be impossible for him to quickly know what drugs are covered by which insurers and what the copays are. He says he already has saved some patients several thousand dollars a year by changing their blood pressure and diabetes medications.

“It doesn’t take a lot of time, and this can be an important intervention,” Rosen says.

Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit, editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation and is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)